logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2017.01.10 2016가단54654
구상금
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to the Defendant Korea Asset Management Co., Ltd., the amount of KRW 25,329,863 and KRW 24,393,240 among them, the amount of KRW 25,329,863.

Reasons

Based on the facts, the Plaintiff is a management organization organized by the occupants of the Daegu-gu apartment A (hereinafter “instant apartment”) and the Defendant Korea Asset Management Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Korea Asset Management Co., Ltd.”) entered into a building management contract with the Plaintiff on Nov. 22, 2012 and manages the instant apartment on Nov. 23, 2013, and Defendant Puu Muung Services Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Puuk Services Co., Ltd”) entered into a defect management service contract for the instant apartment as the contractor of the instant apartment on Apr. 23, 2013 and conducts defect management.

On November 11, 2013, at around 11:56, a fire (hereinafter “instant fire”) occurred in the space used as a warehouse of the instant apartment 101-dong underground parking lot (hereinafter “instant warehouse”).

Of the vehicles parked in the underground parking lot due to the instant fire, there was an accident that destroyed B Ecoos car, CWz car, Dlandberber car, E E Amils car, etc. (hereinafter “instant accident”). The owner of the said vehicle, etc. entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with Samsung Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Semull Fire”) or Hyundai Marine Fire & Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Semull Sea”).

Samsung Fire paid insurance money for the instant accident, and filed a claim for reimbursement against the Plaintiff and Samsung Construction Co., Ltd. as the Daegu District Court 2014Kadan101283, and the said court dismissed the claim for Samsung Fire.

However, on October 7, 2015, the appellate court (Tgu District Court 2015Na30133) dismissed an appeal against Samsung Fire Co., Ltd. on the ground that the Plaintiff constitutes the possessor of a structure stipulated in Article 758(1) of the Civil Act, and partly accepted an appeal against the Plaintiff, thereby 75,383,400 won and this.

arrow