logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.12.10 2015다30565
손해배상(기)
Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate brief filed after the deadline).

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, this part of the ground of appeal by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is an issue of the selection of evidence and fact-finding, which are the exclusive authority of the lower court, which is a fact-finding court, and cannot be deemed a legitimate ground of appeal. Furthermore, even in light of the record, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by failing

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, a defect in the building means a structural and functional defect different from the contents stipulated in the construction contract, or a defect that has not been properly equipped with quality ordinarily in light of the transaction concept. The issue of whether the defect is a defect must be determined by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances, including the content of the contract between the parties concerned, whether the building was constructed as designed, and whether the building conforms to the standards stipulated

(Supreme Court Decision 2008Da16851 Decided December 9, 2010). The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, determined as follows: (i) construction of the instant construction, (ii) construction of the boundary axiss, (iii) construction of individual waterworks, (iv) construction of the building of a factory, (iv) construction of the building of a factory at the entrance of the factory, (v) construction of the ducts, (vi) construction of the ducts, and (vii) construction of the factory ducts, and (vii) construction of the factory ducts,

In light of the above legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and it did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the defect of a building.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

arrow