logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.02.08 2016가단111662
하자보수금청구의 소
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 18,183,48 for the Plaintiff and its related KRW 5% per annum from July 18, 2017 to February 8, 2018.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 18, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant and Kimhae-si, setting the construction cost of KRW 4220 million as to the civil construction work on the land site B 1,527 square meters and the construction work on the ground (hereinafter “instant factory”) and the construction work on the land (hereinafter “instant construction work”).

B. After that, the Defendant completed the instant construction, and the Plaintiff paid the full amount of the construction cost.

[Ground of recognition] Facts that there is no dispute or does not clearly dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 4 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) is inevitable to continuously rupture and rupture with respect to the outside work site of the plant of this case and the plant of this case, the cracks of the parking lot floor, and the heat of the parking lot floor. As such, the filling method of injecting cement and cement paint on the rupture part cannot be deemed as a sufficient defect repair method to prevent rupture, and it is necessary to reinforce and construct the rupture network at least to prevent continuous rupture and rupture, and it is necessary to cover KRW 31,05,928 at the cost of defect repair.

(2) 1,045,071 Won is needed as defect repair costs related to water leakage of factory buildings in the factory building.

(3) 5,605,721 won is required as the defect repair cost related to the erroneous construction of the fence of the factory fence.

(4) The non-installationd drawings of a retaining wall indicate that the retaining wall should be installed at the end of the external floor (work site and parking lot), but the defendant installed the retaining wall at will, unlike the drawings, at the end of the external floor, not at the end of the external floor. The cost of installing the retaining wall at the end of the external floor should be calculated as the cost of repairing defects, and 19,687,478 won is required at the repair cost related thereto.

B. (1) The determination on the cause of the claim does not involve any dispute, or is clearly disputed, with respect to the difference between external workplaces and parking lot floor cracks.

arrow