logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.11.17 2014가합47233
손해배상(기) 등
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 135,175,771 among the Plaintiff and KRW 101,00,000 among the Plaintiff, shall be KRW 34,175,71 from July 23, 2015 to KRW 34,175,71.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an autonomous management organization that is composed of occupants for the management of the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B Apartment (6 households of this case, 187 households of this case, 187 households, and 90 households are leased households. The Defendant is a project undertaker who constructed and sold the apartment in this case, and the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “participating”) is the construction works of the apartment in this case.

B. 1) The apartment of this case had undergone a pre-use inspection on May 15, 2008. The apartment of this case had not constructed the part to be constructed in accordance with the design drawing, unlike the drawing, or was constructed in a defective manner, and the Plaintiff continuously demanded the repair of defects in the common area and the section for exclusive use of this case from September 1, 2008. 2) The apartment of this case still remains in the co-ownership and the section for exclusive use of the apartment of this case as stated in the table of repair costs by the defect list of the attached Form 1 and the table of repair costs by the defect list of the attached Form 2 (the total sum of the repair costs of the unit for exclusive use of the apartment of this case is as stated in attached Table 3). The comprehensive statement of the repair costs is as follows.

(Standard for Partial Doners). (Units: Won)

C. 1) The Plaintiff received damages in lieu of the defect repair from each sectional owner of 85 households (excluding the households indicated in the Compilation Table of Repair Costs for each of the households that sold the instant apartment units) among the 90 households that are apartment units (attached Form 3), respectively, and notified the Defendant of the right to notify the assignment of the right to claim damages as to the household on April 14, 2015, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the right to claim damages by content-certified mail as to the household on July 15, 2015, and each of the above notification reached the Defendant around that time. 2) The sum of the total sum of 90 households of the apartment units of the instant apartment units of this case reaches the Defendant by content-certified mail.

arrow