beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff's assertion
A. On August 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a design contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with Defendant C, an employee of Defendant B, to construct a building on the land surface (hereinafter “instant building”) around 10,000 won in design contract amounting to KRW 10,000,000, among Defendant B, around August 2010.
B. Although the Defendants comprehensively delegated the design and other work from the Plaintiff, they did not entirely state that the Plaintiff should pay farmland preservation charges, deemed acquisition tax, and development charges for the refund of development gains when they constructed the instant building with farmland diverted to the land for the Plaintiff.
C. After constructing the instant building, the Plaintiff paid KRW 114,170,620 in excess of the amount of development charges of KRW 57,762,40, farmland preservation charges of KRW 49,50,00, deemed acquisition tax of KRW 7,657,060, and KRW 114,170,620.
The Defendants: (a) designed the instant building pursuant to Article 23(1) of the Certified Architects Act; and (b) neglected to perform their duties in good faith pursuant to Article 20 of the Certified Architects Act; and (c) neglected to perform their duties of care; and (d) particularly, in the case of development charges, the development charges shall be imposed at least 90 square meters, which is the area of the land subject to the project approved, etc. under Article 5 of the Restitution of Development Gains Act; (b) if the Plaintiff designed only one parcel of
E. Therefore, the Defendants are liable for compensating the Plaintiff for damages incurred by the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 20(2) of the Certified Architects Act, given that the foundation of wrong design drawings causes damage to the Plaintiff, the amount of damages is KRW 24,750,00 (=49,500,000 x 50%), 3,828,530 (=7,657,060 x 50%) totaling KRW 86,340,930 (7,65,060 x 50%) based on development charges and the Plaintiff’s fault ratio.
2. The Defendants are jointly liable for damages.