logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2021.01.13 2019나36231
손해배상(기)
Text

The judgment of the first instance is revoked.

All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs.

Reasons

Basic Facts

The Plaintiffs are owners of the instant apartment E E-dong (hereinafter referred to as the “Gho Lake”) and the Defendant is the owner of the said apartment E E-ho (hereinafter referred to as the “Fho”).

Around November 2018, Fico occurred in the Ghocheon and the part part on the wall surface “Gho Lakecheon and the part on the wall surface.” As a result, the damage under subparagraph G arose, as seen in paragraph (b) of the aforementioned basic facts. The grounds for recognition were as follows: (a) each description of evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and 10 (including each number) and images of the evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and 10 (hereinafter “the damage of this case”); and (b) the summary of the plaintiffs’ assertion of the purport of the whole pleading, among F, the part on the wall of the boiler cell room and the part on the wall surface of the Vietnamagu floor (hereinafter “water of this case”).

Therefore, as the occupant and owner of the F’s structure, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiffs the construction cost of KRW 3,520,000 for construction cost, KRW 200,000 for proving the content, KRW 300,000 for expenses for removing air conditioners, KRW 1.60,000 for expenses for installing air conditioners, KRW 5,000 for consolation money, KRW 9.18,000 for damages for delay (per Plaintiff 4,590,000 for each of the plaintiffs), and the obligation to perform the water leakage prevention work described in paragraph 2 for the purport of the claim.

Judgment

First, it is examined whether the damage of this case occurred due to the leakage of this case by the plaintiffs' assertion.

In light of the following circumstances, the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs alone is insufficient to recognize that the damage of this case occurred due to the leakage of the plaintiffs' assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

① Of the instant damages, F No. 1 is related to “Gho Lake and the part on wall surface”.

arrow