logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2017.11.30 2017가합1300
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to purchase the first floor No. 118 (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) and paid the down payment and part of the sales price.

B. The first floor photo of the instant commercial building, attached to the guide book for sale, is marked with a height of 5,500 meters, and the advertisement phrase “776 large and detailed parking lots and 50 cm high (1st floor) with a height of 50 cm high” is written.

C. On June 13, 2016, the Plaintiff prepared a written contract with the Defendant to purchase the instant commercial building by setting the sales price of KRW 596,400,00 and the scheduled date of salesroom occupants to be notified individually. D.

Around June 31, 2016, the Defendant completed the instant commercial building and delivered it to the Plaintiff. As a result of measuring the height from the upper surface of the floor surface of the completed commercial building to the lower surface of the floor surface of the upper floor, 101-104 of the commercial building was confirmed to be 5,861m, 105-108m, 5,613m, 109-111m, 5,395m, 112-15m, 5,139m, and 116-19m, 4,860m.

E. Article 119(1)8 of the Enforcement Decree of the Building Act defines the height of the floor from the upper surface of the floor to the upper surface of the floor surface of the upper floor.

【Evidence Evidence Nos. 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On April 9, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) concluded a contract with the Defendant to purchase the instant commercial building at a rate of 560,000,000 won; and (b) no later than November 31, 2015, with a height of 5,500 meters until November 31, 2015.

1) On June 31, 2016, the Defendant delivered the instant commercial building to the Plaintiff on June 31, 2016, where 213 days had been delayed compared to the scheduled sale price. Accordingly, the Defendant did not gain any profit that the Plaintiff would obtain by running normal business during the period of delayed sale in the instant commercial building, which is calculated according to the compensation rate for delay in the sales contract (i.e., 560,000 won x 213 days x 14,000 won.

arrow