logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2020.02.12 2019나21509
손해배상(건)
Text

1. The judgment of the court of first instance, including the plaintiff's claim extended or added by this court, is ordered to be set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 4, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased three-story E from F to multi-household housing in Seoul Special Metropolitan City Gwangjin-gu (hereinafter “instant building”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff on March 30, 2015.

B. On September 28, 200, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Defendant with respect to the instant building G, and sold it to Nonparty H on August 2017, and completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of H on September 29, 2017.

C. In around 2017, the Plaintiff demanded that the Defendant take measures to prevent water leakage on the ceiling of the living room of the instant building E in several times, but the Defendant did not take any particular measures.

The Plaintiff leased the instant building E to Nonparty I at KRW 20,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 500,000,000. However, due to such leakage, the Plaintiff terminated the instant building E on March 7, 2017. From March 2019 to March 7, 2019, the Plaintiff directly resided in the said subparagraph from March 2019.

E. On July 13, 2018, the appraiser J submitted to the first instance court a written appraisal to the following purport:

The water sources in the instant building E were located in the toilet drainage pipes and laundry pipe drainage pipes in G, the floor level of which was high at a level of 20 cm as they were laid in the bend floor of G, and it is presumed that water leakage was generated in this pipe.

In addition, it is presumed that rainwater has invadedd into a place where the lower part of the Bedergelgggel was cut down and the water is aggravated.

The remuneration construction cost incurred by the Plaintiff in relation to the building E of this case around March 2017 is KRW 1,334,00, and the remuneration construction cost incurred in relation to the above water leakage prevention is KRW 5,516,400, and KRW 3,107,60 in the case of the building E of this case as of June 23, 2018.

F. On August 16, 2018, appraiser J sent a reply to the first instance court to the following purport.

arrow