logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2015.03.05 2013나10086
구상금
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

3. The plaintiff is the defendant corporation.

Reasons

1. Basic facts: ① The Plaintiff and the purchaser who newly built and sold the 1,026 household units in Geumdong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-Yandong-dong-dong-Yandong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si. On October 7, 1998, the Plaintiff contracted the construction of the instant apartment at the rate of 50:10:32:8 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract”) to the Debtor Rehabilitation Co., Ltd., a joint supply and demand company (hereinafter referred to as the “Rehabilitation Co., Ltd”), Korea Development Co., Ltd., a joint supply and demand company and Yangyang Construction Co., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Co., Ltd.”) to the rehabilitation company-based share of 68%.

If any defect occurs in the new construction of the apartment in this case after the joint contractor under the contract of this case is dissolved, the joint contractor shall be jointly and severally liable.

(2) On February 8, 2002, the Debtor Rehabilitation Company and the Defendant Collaborative Construction Company completed the instant apartment and delivered the instant apartment to the Plaintiff after undergoing a pre-use inspection. The Plaintiff sold the instant apartment to the occupants around that time.

③ However, there were many defects in the apartment of this case due to the construction of the apartment of this case by the rehabilitation company, the contractor, and the defendant joint construction company, or the construction of the part to be constructed in accordance with the design drawing, or the defective construction of the apartment of this case. At the request of the council of occupants' representatives, etc. of the apartment of this case, the rehabilitation company and the defendant joint construction company were performing partial repair construction works, but still the apartment of this case, there are defects in the separate sheet and repair cost.

arrow