(영문) 청주지방법원 2016.03.16 2013가합26996

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 청주지방법원 2016.03.16 2013가합26996

하자보수비 등

Text

1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part concerning the claim for damages due to defect repairs is dismissed.

2. The defendant shall make 35,805 to the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Around April 2012, B, the Plaintiff’s wife, entered into a contract with the Defendant on December 2, 2012, setting the contract amount of KRW 906,400,00, and the completion date of construction (hereinafter “the first contract”) for the construction of a new building on one parcel outside Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. The instant building was approved for use on April 12, 2013, and the Plaintiff completed registration of ownership preservation on May 7, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 3-1, Gap evidence 7-1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. We examine the legitimacy of the part concerning the claim for damages caused by the defect repair in the lawsuit of this case, ex officio, as to the lawfulness of the part concerning the claim for damages caused by the defect repair.

A. The gist of this part of the lawsuit is that the 60-day repair work is required for the use of the building of this case, such as rupture repair and waterproof measures, and the building of this case is not used due to the repair work. Thus, the defendant is entitled to seek compensation for damages equivalent to the profits (the plaintiff's alleged damages amount: 25,848,960 won) that the plaintiff could have gained from the operation of the building of this case as the rupture public announcement.

B. We examine this part of the lawsuit, which is a future performance lawsuit, and it is unlawful in the future as it does not meet the requirements of future performance lawsuit, since the issue of whether the defect repair work will actually take place in the building in the future at the time of the closing of argument in this case, the period of repair work, the degree of impact of the repair work on the notified source business has not been determined, and it is not possible to clearly estimate the nature and scope of the damage claim claimed by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to

3. A claim for compensation due to delay in construction works;

A. The construction completion date of the instant building’s assertion by the Plaintiff is December 30, 2012.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2020.10.14 2020가단547414

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.22 2016나62759

-대전고등법원 (청주) 2017.01.10 2016나10774

-수원지방법원안산지원 2019.01.09 2018가단67216

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.27 2015나50957