logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.12.09 2018나2036432
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for this part of the reasoning is that the court’s reasoning is with respect to this part of this part, except for the following 3 pages of the judgment of the first instance, with the exception of the part of “feass for the reinforcement of feass for the feass for the feass for the 7 line” as “feass for the feass for the feass for the feass for the feass for the feass for the feass for the 7 line

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion occurred due to defects existing in the part of the ground reinforcement work (hereinafter “the ground reinforcement work of this case”) among the construction works executed by the Defendant under the instant subcontract, and due to defective construction, the said part of the road and the ground subsidence, and accordingly, the Plaintiff spent KRW 77,426,086, and KRW 189,213,913,913, respectively, for the construction cost to repair the laping work again.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 70,387,350,00, excluding the value-added tax, from the construction cost of the above Rarating construction cost as a substitute for defect repair pursuant to Article 667(2) of the Civil Act. ② Since the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 172,012,650, excluding the value-added tax amount, from the construction cost of the above concrete front section, as a compensation for damages due to incomplete performance among nonperformance pursuant to Article 390 of the Civil Act, among the nonperformance of obligation pursuant to Article 390 of the Civil Act, to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Plaintiff

3. In order to establish the contractor's warranty liability, there are defects in the part of the ground reinforcement work of this case among the objects completed under the subcontract of this case, and the defendant's liability for damages due to incomplete performance among non-performance of obligation is established.

arrow