beta
대구지방법원 2017.05.31 2016나11347

공사대금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant’s KRW 17,160,000 for the Plaintiff and its related expenses from December 1, 2014 to June 1, 2015.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in construction machinery and equipment leasing business, and the Defendant is a corporation that runs construction business.

B. On October 23, 2014, the Defendant received a contract from Handong Comprehensive Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Handong Comprehensive Construction”) for lighting, tailing, windows, glass, painting, etc. among the construction works for extension of the C Middle School.

(hereinafter “instant construction project”). C.

On October 15, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with D, which took overall control of the instant construction site, to provide construction equipment from October 15, 2014 to around October 2014 at the instant construction site (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

Accordingly, the standard form contract for construction machinery lease (hereinafter “the instant contract”) written on the same day includes KRW 23,00,000,000 for equipment costs and construction cost (hereinafter “construction cost”) and the due date for payment (where the lease period is not more than one month, by the end of the following month from the end of the end of the lease period), and the lessor’s section stated D as the site agent in the Plaintiff, lessee, and agent column.

The Plaintiff provided the Plaintiff with the construction equipment at the construction site of this case and completed the file construction around October 2014. The construction cost of this case is KRW 17,160,000 (including value-added tax) which deducts the service cost, oil cost, etc. from the construction cost of KRW 23,00,000 under the instant contract.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 9, Eul evidence No. 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. On the contrary, the Plaintiff entered into the instant contract with D, the Defendant’s site manager, and accordingly, puts construction equipment into the instant construction site to file construction work. As such, the Defendant, as a party to the instant contract, is the Plaintiff, the construction cost of KRW 17,160,000, and this is accordingly.