207Gahap20481 Repair of Defects

See Attached List of Parties (Omission, P1 et al., 400 persons)

[Judgment of the court below]

D Construction Co., Ltd.

Seoul High Court Decision 200

[Defendant-Appellee]

October 29, 2008

November 19, 2008

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Defendant 1, 997, 036 won for each of 30 Plaintiffs, etc., and 1,94, 072 won for each of the remaining Plaintiffs, and each of them

The rate of 20% per annum from the day after the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment.

d. Payment of money:

1. Basic facts

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or may be acknowledged by Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4-1, 2, 1-2, and 1, and the testimony of the witness Lee Jae-mo, taking into account the whole purport of the pleadings:

A. The plaintiffs are 44 square or 55 square or co-owners of the D1st apartment (hereinafter referred to as "the apartment of this case") located in the Busan Northern-dong, Busan-dong, and the defendant is a housing constructor who constructed the above apartment and sold it to the plaintiffs.

B. In around 1999, the Defendant advertised for the sale of the apartment of this case, and the contents thereof are as follows.

(1) What is the apartment space "A" is the apartment space of the apartment space with the size of the first 4 square meters of the unit size of the apartment unit on the eb.g., Busan e., the size of the apartment unit: (1) the first 21st century type of the new ebstin in the Republic of Korea - the plane of the first ebstin in the 21st century type of the new ebstin in the Republic of Korea - the plane that is basically made the space much wider than the space by forming the balcony, the balcony and the living room, and the bedroom, and the area actually expanded is included in the public register as much as the area actually wided is included. (2) The area is equal to four square meters, and the price is equal to four square meters, and the area actually increased is not included in the sale price.

Therefore, the sale price is as it is, but the actual area is larger than 4 to 5 square meters. ③ Free construction cost equivalent to 20,00,000 won is reduced by approximately 20,00,00,000, which is incurred by the occupants in performing individual construction works. (In the case of expanded construction items of the Dtade, - 44,55 square meters, such as the construction of the floor board of the original wood floor, heating pipes, heating pipes, the reinforcement of the ceiling and walls, system windows, etc. - - 44,5 square meters, and 55 square meters) Free construction of items extended in living rooms (Evidence 1) (2) sale advertisement (construction of the original wood floor floor floor construction, heating pipes, the reinforcement of the ceiling and wall heat, system windows, etc.) free construction of items extended in living rooms (Evidence 1)

A spaw and bed - A spawal window for a spawal design. Unlike the general windows, the system windows are various methods of opening and closing windows, and their appearance is weak, and even if they are short windows, they are high-priced windows that have improved the unity, confidentiality, and confidentiality. The defendant constructed the living rooms of each household of the apartment of this case by system windows, and the inside and outside windows were constructed by plastic windows, which are a kind of general windows.

D. The representative meeting of the occupants of the apartment of this case requested the defendant to replace each household with the system creation on two occasions, and the defendant sent a reply to review it as the first official document, and the defendant sent a reply to the second official document to accept the said request on the condition that the contractor and the tenant would reflect on the cost of replacing the house.

2. The parties' assertion

The plaintiffs asserted that, although they advertised as if they were to perform the work under the system creation of each household's living room and inside room by way of the books for sale in lots, they actually constructed with only a living room system, and they constructed with a plastic window instead of a system creation, they constitute significant defects, and thus, they are responsible for compensating the plaintiffs for damages caused by nonperformance of their duties.

In regard to this, the Defendant indicated in the sale advertisement that the dwelling space was installed in the system, and that the window of the inside room was installed in the model house at the time of sale, and explained that it was installed in the model house, and that there was a plastic window and a shot window installed in the inside room, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant installed a system window even in the inside room on the basis of only the text stated in the evidence No. 1.

3. Determination;

It is difficult to view that the sales contract of apartment units was completed as its own without any specific content on the external form and quality of the apartment units subject to the sales contract. The apartment units sales contract of this case is based on the premise that the external form and quality of the apartment units can be embodied by model and various printed materials. It is not related to the external form and quality of the apartment units among the contents of the advertisement, but it cannot be viewed that the contents of the advertisement can be handled as it is. However, in light of social norms as to the external form and quality of the apartment units, it can be seen that the purchaser of the apartment units can request the implementation of the sales contract as the content of the contract, and it can be viewed that the purchaser of the apartment units was trusted and the purchaser of the apartment units was aware of the content of the sales contract, and it is reasonable to view that there was an implied agreement between the purchaser and the purchaser of the apartment units with the content of the sales contract of the sales contract of this case without any special circumstance such as the seller's reservation of the contract (see Supreme Court Decision 201Da5285, Jun. 28, 2007).

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim against the defendant of this case is dismissed in entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judge Park Tae-tae

Judges out of Category