1. Case Overview

The plaintiff, a company engaged in housing construction and development projects, alleged that waste materials were discovered on a portion of land purchased from the defendant local public corporation during the course of construction.

After incurring waste disposal costs, the plaintiff filed suit against the seller, asserting that the land was defective and seeking damages based on both warranty liability and tort liability.
 

2. Key Issues

The principal issues in dispute were:

• Whether the seller could be held liable under warranty principles for waste discovered on the property;

• Whether the contractual disclaimer clause applied;

• Whether the disclaimer clause was legally valid and enforceable;

• Whether the waste had in fact been buried during the defendant's development or management of the property (thereby giving rise to tort liability);

• Whether the defendant could be held liable for the waste disposal costs incurred by the plaintiff.

3. Legal Strategy

Attorneys Jun‑woo Park and Sung‑hoon Park of One Law Partners, LLC focused on the contractual provisions and objective evidence in defending the case.

· Enforcement of the Contractual Disclaimer Clause
The agreement contained a disclaimer provision exempting the defendant from liability for waste discovered below the original ground level.
Even based on the plaintiff's own submissions, the waste had been buried beneath the original ground level. The attorneys therefore demonstrated that the disclaimer clause applied and barred any damages claim against the defendant.

The attorneys also persuaded the court, based on established case law and legal principles, that the disclaimer provision was legally valid and enforceable.
Furthermore, they challenged the reliability of the plaintiff's evidence, noting that it was not based on precise surveying results or coordinates.

· Establishing the Facts Through Objective Evidence
The attorneys demonstrated the lack of probative value of evidence that was not based on accurate survey data and measurements.
In addition, they presented objective evidence concerning:

• survey records and measurements;

• the type, location, and depth of the waste materials;

• the lawfulness of waste disposal practices during prior land development projects conducted before the sale.

Through this evidence, they established that liability could not be attributed to the defendant.

4. Significance of the Decision
The court accepted the arguments advanced by One Law Partners, LLC and dismissed all of the plaintiff's claims at both the trial and appellate levels.
The court upheld the validity and enforceability of the disclaimer clause contained in the sale agreement and ruled that:

• the mere existence of waste on the property does not automatically establish warranty liability on the part of the seller; and

• there was insufficient evidence to conclude that the defendant had buried the waste materials in question.

This decision is significant because it underscores the importance of contractual terms and disclaimer provisions in disputes involving waste or alleged defects discovered after a land sale.

The case further confirms that a seller's liability must be determined on the basis of objective evidence, including survey data, the location and nature of the waste, and the circumstances surrounding its discovery.
 

Attorney Jun‑woo Park | jwpark@onelawpartners.com
Attorney Sung‑hoon Park | shpark@onelawpartners.com
 

Public Relations Team, One Law Partners, LLC | pr@onelawpartners.com