logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.02.03 2014나58414
손해배상(기)
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for “the parts to be modified” under paragraph (2) below, and thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be dried;

A. Attached Form 7 to Form 9 of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter referred to as the “instant tables”)

(3) On July 9, 2013, at the time of this case’s appraisal standard date, the Table of Totalization by Attached List of Defects (hereinafter “instant Table”) still remains as of July 9, 2013, when there is any defect described in the “Items of Claim for Appraisal” (except for classification 53, 55, 56).

) Each defect, such as the description, remains without being repaired."

(b) On Part 3, Section 11 of the first instance court's decision "the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the result of each entrustment of appraisal to appraiser A by this court" is "the result of the on-site inspection by the court of first instance, the result of each entrustment of appraisal to appraiser A by the court of first instance."

(c) Decision 2-B of the first instance court.

The part of paragraph (3) of this Article (from No. 19 to No. 5) shall be cut in accordance with the following subparagraphs:

“B. Of the cited parts, the Plaintiff asserts that KRW 234,962,022 should be recognized as the cost of removing concrete from the floor of the Han-rop rooftop and the second floor (house) parking lot among the instant buildings and the cost of repairing the track. First of all, the result of each appraisal commissioned by the court of first instance to the appraiser A by the court of first instance, as follows: (i) the rooftop floor of the instant building was used as a parking lot; (ii) the rooftop floor of the instant building was not constructed for the T3.0 poly floor strengthening system; (iii) the concrete heat and sprinklering phenomenon (e) the other rooftop floor and the rooftop parking lot were generated; and (iv) the parking lot is installed at the entrance of the rooftop and the entrance of the rooftop.

arrow