• International conference on construction engineering and project management
• /
• 2005.10a
• /
• pp.447-451
• /
• 2005

The purpose of this study is to improve regulations such as law and standard contract forms related to defects liability in Korea. Defects liability has been one of the major causes of construction contract disputes in Korea in recent years. It is important to avoid or resolve disputes regarding defects liability through regulations containing clear criteria and to specify the standard regarding the mitigation and remission of the contractor's defects liability. This study was carried out through document research and analysis of judicial precedents. The following are the courses of improvement regarding the mitigation and remission of defects liability in Korea. First, laws and standard contract forms must contain more detailed clauses regarding exemption of a contractor's defects liability, which clearly set out the scope of the defects liability of the contractor. Second, the current system for defects liability favors the owner rather than the contractor - it is necessary to change the defects liability system in order to give the owner and the contractor an equal standing. Third, strict liability is taken on by the contractor even when the term of guarantee for defects lasts longer than the legally set period of liability for defects. Hence, it is necessary to improve the system by alleviating the liability of the contractor through applying negligence liability as opposed to strict liability during the term of guarantee.

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Building Construction
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.195-202
• /
• 2018

The defects that are bound to arise in most construction projects cause disputes among the contracting parties regarding the defect warranty liability (DWL)guaranteed by the retention of the contractor's performance security at the end of the performance period of the contract. Most current projects involve a multiple-tier contractual relationship, causing the liability for some defects to overlap. In addition, many construction projects are made up of multiple detailed work types which an expert hired by the owner inspects the part completed by the contractor and pays an interim payment. However, after the completion of work, the contractor will still hold the defect warranty liability. In a scenario in which the work is delayed due to reasons for which the owner is responsible, the defect warranty liability period is also increased, imposing an additional burden on the contractor. In this study, basic research was carried out with the goal of reducing problems related to defect warranty liability Problems related to defect warranty liability cases and the nature of the defect warranty liability period were investigated. Possible solutions to the problems caused by the DWL that were suggested include the separation of the negligence liability period and the strict liability period, as well as the introduction of a retention money system.

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Building Construction
• /
• v.17 no.4
• /
• pp.385-391
• /
• 2017

The warranty liability period for defects in apartment buildings by work type is not based on scientific analysis, making the appropriateness of the term a culprit behind the lawsuits. Therefore, this research aims to evaluate the appropriateness of the warranty liability term of apartment buildings by identifying the current status of defects, in particular, caused by finishing works. That is because the number of defects, caused during the finishing works, accounted for the largest portion of the total defect cases of apartment buildings reported to the Apartment Defect Dispute Mediation Committee under the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport of Korea between 2010 and 2011. The result from analyzing claims for defect repairs of the finishing works showed that most cases by work type continued to be made after two years, and only about 60% were charged within the warranty period. And, defects by work type have correlation, which needs to be considered for a better construction technique. Considering a low correlation between the possibility of defects and the construction performance rankings, which are highly relevant to the apartment preference. It is believed that there needs to be a qualification process for agencies that actually performs finishing works.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Building Construction Conference
• /
• 2017.05a
• /
• pp.278-279
• /
• 2017

Result from Amendment of Apartment Houses Decree Customer Service, Recently, the starting point of Defects Liability changed "Criteria of Completion date" to "Delivery date to Divided property". Through the Law amended, There are some inconsistency between "Claim for repairing defects" and "Period of security deposit for repairing defects claim". If someone bought a house after Completion date, Purchasing period of "Claim to security deposit for repairing defects" lapsed without renewal. This research is to identify problems and solutions for improving the system.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Building Construction Conference
• /
• 2008.05a
• /
• pp.153-157
• /
• 2008

The construction market has gradually become complexity, variety and specialization, and then owner's requirements about quality has become various. In order to solve the problem such as stated above, advanced constructions in United Kingdom, Japan and United States have introduced warranty contract which is warranted to quality and performance for need of owner in determined term to ensure the quality of construction since 1960s. However, the interior of a country encounter another problem result from defects liability what indefiniteness of defects standard, excess responsibility period, social recognition of be identical fraudulent work and defects, and contract with ascendancy of owners. etc, so builders concerned more excess defects liability than the quality of construction. The purpose of this study is to analysis of warranty contract in order to solve the problem such as stated above.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Building Construction Conference
• /
• 2007.04a
• /
• pp.89-92
• /
• 2007

Since 1960s, advanced constructions have introduced warranty contract which is warranted to quality and performance for need of owner in determined term to ensure the quality of construction. However, the interior of a country encounter another problem result from Defects Liability what indefiniteness of defects standard, excess responsibility period, social recognition of be identical fraudulent work and defects, and contract with ascendancy of owners. etc, so builders concerned more excess defects liability than the quality of construction. The purpose of this study is to analysis of warranty contract in order to solve the problem such as stated above.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Building Construction Conference
• /
• 2015.05a
• /
• pp.245-246
• /
• 2015

Cases of lawsuit and conflict are increasing because of defects in apartments in use after the completion of construction. Further, with changes in the consciousness of residents and in the social environment, many residents are showing interest in defect-related lawsuits. However, the term of warranty liability defined in the current law is not practically appropriate, and the verification of the determination of the term of warranty liability is insufficient. Against this background, this research aims to evaluate the appropriateness of defect repair periods by examining the actual defect condition of the finishing work among the various defects related to apartments. Collected performance data are analyzed by statistical techniques by considering the defect occurrence rate per construction type and the construction year of the finishing work in apartment construction. The analysis results will be used as basic data for evaluating the appropriateness of the standards for the term finishing works warranty liability.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.44
• /
• pp.31-55
• /
• 2009

This study attempts to provide a comparative overview of the liability systems Korean law and the PELS adopt, that is, the approaches taken by Korean law and the PELS to deal with various irregularities of contractual performance. In addition, it examines in a comparative way the questions of what is the position of the seller's liability for his delivery of defective goods under the chosen liability system and what is the legal nature of the seller's liability. The study finds that the dual liability system taken by Korean law has caused some complexities as to the matter of which liability is applicable in some borderline cases. The problem in such complexities is originated in that the remedies available and the limitation period applicable are differentiated in accordance with one's different categorization among three types of default under the general liability and defective performance under the seller's guarantee liability. In this light, the study argues that the unified liability system under the PELS is superior because its concept of non-performance embraces in a unitary manner all the aspects of default including defects in quality, quantity and title. In addition, it finds that Korean law has suffered endless debates on the question of what are the true contents of the same remedies of rescission and damages provided under the seller's guarantee liability as under the general liability. The debates have been come along on the basis of the traditional presumption among some of civil law jurisdictions that two liabilities be different in terms of not only their legal nature but also their contents of remedies. The study argues that the problem may be circumvented, first, by another way of thinking that the unified liability in Korean law is inferred from the specification of the identical remedies for both the general liability and the seller's guarantee liability under the KCC, second, by the preposition that the requirement of fault be depended upon what remedy the buyer seeks to claim rather than what liability he does to rely on.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.40 no.4
• /
• pp.104-113
• /
• 2012

This study aimed to find out the improvement plan through analyzing the perception of the expert group engaged in landscape architectural construction and to focus on analyzing the expert groups' experience on Landscape Construction Defects (LCD), defect liability, warranty period, and implementation of the defect liability. The results are as follows: 1. Regarding the experience on the LCD, landscape construction contractors were an awareness of the LCD issue at a serious level, while public-sector clients recognize moderately the LCD issue; and on the first priority in defect implementation, landscape construction contractors considered repair cost while public-sector clients value the identifying causes of defects. 2. In disagreement on the defect liability, landscape construction contractors attributed it to client's lack of responsibility for maintenance while public-sector clients ascribed it to the absence of dealing a criteria with LCD, and regarding the appropriate defect implementation, public-sector clients preferred the following objective by dealing the criteria with LCD while landscape construction contractors advocates by sharing the responsibilities for dealing with LCD based on the identified causes of construction defects. 3. Regarding the warranty period, the public-sector clients considered the 2-year warranty period as appropriate while landscape construction contractors considered it comparatively long, and concerning the commencement of defect warranty period, the public-sector clients viewed it as it should commence to cover the overall completion of the construction while landscape construction contractors perceived it to start on the completion of each work. 4. As for the improvement of the defect implementation system, public-sector clients considered it necessary to establish the objective dealing the criteria with LCD while landscape construction contractors viewed the legislation of maintenance duty. Also, with regard to the important value in establishing and dealing the criteria with LCD, public-sector clients pointed out the objective of the criteria for determining the defects per work type while landscape construction contractors suggested client (user)'s maintenance duty. Because of research, because the system in dealing with LCD is an absence of LCD management agency and dealing the criteria with LCD, it is needed to establish an LCD management agency and make the system in dealing with LCD.

• Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.65-75
• /
• 2022

On 11 June 2021, the Supreme Court ruled that the judgment of the lower court was justified for the subject case, that the plaintiff could assert the defendant's liability for default due to incomplete performance even though the warranty period for defects which stipulated in the particular condition of the contract has expired. In Korean civil law, the concurrent between the exclusion period for defect warranty and the extinctive prescription for default liability is conceded, since the exclusion period and the extinctive prescription have their respective purposes in law, therefore these two should be judged by harmonizing them based on that they are mutually related. If the subject judgment is generalized, there is no reason to exist for the provisions of defect liability in the construction contract any longer. This study examines the subject judgments through the general theory and precedent case studies on the defect liability and default liability, then derived any problems that may arise if the subject judgment is generalized. In addition, based on a realistic model, it was suggested for a practical improvement method that both the provisions of the warranty period shall be changed realistic and to stipulate the character of its nature as written provisions in the contract.