공동주택 사용검사 전 하자의 하자보수보증금 제도에 관한 고찰

Because there is no policy mandating defect repair security deposit paid before Apartment House building pre-use inspections, residents and builders are increasingly experiencing disputes, with many residents suffering damage. In order to alleviate this situation, the current study examines the introduction of defect repair security deposit made before conducting pre-use inspections, in addition to security liability period, through laws and regulations. Also, by analyzing court judgments on compensations for defects, the current study discovers issues regarding the ratio of court-ordered compensation for defects discovered before pre-use inspections, in addition to conducting analysis on security liability period and the amount of court-ordered compensation for various facility construction projects. Furthermore, experts are interviewed regarding such problems to develop the following proposal to introduce a policy for defect repair security deposit before conducting pre-use inspections, and laws and regulations to implement that policy. First, The current study suggests implementing a policy of requiring builders to make defect repair deposit in accordance with Article 41 of the Enforcement Decree of the Apartment House Management Act (Making and Keeping Custody of Security Deposit for Repairing Defects). Second, In terms of the scope (calculation criteria) of the said defect repair security deposit, it is proposed that experts should conduct research and analysis before making a determination. Third, The enforcement of the deposit policy is suggested to include “portions not constructed and portions constructed differently from the original plan.” Fourth, The current study also suggests adopting the security liability period for various structural defects mentioned in Attachment 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the Multi-family Housing Management Act and Article 36 of the same law (Period of Warranty Liability). Fifth, The security deposit should be used directly by the council of occupants’ representatives or by a third party to repair defects as per Article 43 of the Enforcement Decree of the Apartment House Management Act, and the same clause of the law should be invoked to regulate that builders who do not conduct repairs to building defects can be subject to claims for the payment of the deposited funds that are by the council of occupants’ representatives as the issuer of the deposit guarantee paper. Lastly, I would like to propose amendments to the “Definition of Defects Before Use Inspection” in the Construction Industry Basic Law, Civil Law, and Building Law.