(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.08.16 2019나2003057

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.08.16 2019나2003057

손해배상(기)등

Text

1. Of the judgments of the first instance court, the part against the defendant in the judgment shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 356,592,408.

Reasons

1. The reasons for this part of the facts of recognition are as follows: ① “Defendant B” is as “Defendant”; “Defendant C” is as “C; and “Defendant D” is as “D”; ② The part of “A No. 15” is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance except for adding “Evidence No. 15” to the part of “No. 6 through No. 5” of the judgment of the first instance. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The reasoning for this part of the judgment regarding the occurrence and scope of defects is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (the part concerning the determination on the occurrence and scope of defects in Section 7) except for the following cases. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Revision] The “Defendants” shall be added to “Defendants”.

The plaintiff at the end of the 8th judgment of the court of first instance (the last 9th judgment of the court of first instance contains a large number of 1,2 years of defect, and hereinafter referred to as "each week 2") shall be followed as follows: "(1) The plaintiff requested compensation for the overall defect after June 2013 when approval for the use of the building of this case was granted, but there still exist a large number of 1,2 years of defect in the building of this case (the defendant asserts that the plaintiff did not directly request the defendant to repair the defect in addition to the request for defect repair made by the plaintiff as of May 31, 2017). However, according to the purport of each of the above evidence written and arguments, according to the whole purport of each of the above evidence, the plaintiff also requested the defendant to repair the defect, as well as C, D, and accordingly, it can be acknowledged that the repair work for the part of the building of this case, such as landscaping defect, was commenced from October 2013).

3. The reasoning of this court for this part of the claim against the defendant is stated as follows, "5.5.5."

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2020.09.16 2020나2011917

-부산고등법원 2017.12.21 2017나25

-서울고등법원 2017.08.18 2016나2067562

-서울고등법원 2019.09.19 2018나2063472

-서울고등법원 2019.12.20 2019나2025897