부당이득금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts: (a) the owner of the instant construction project performed by C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “instant construction project”); (b) the Plaintiff, on June 2, 2014, entrusted the supervision of the instant construction project to the Defendant as remuneration of KRW 55,00,000; (c) the instant construction project was completed and the instant officetel was approved for use; (d) there was no dispute between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, a contractor, over whether construction works were defective.
2. The Defendant, which caused the Plaintiff’s claim, is obligated to supervise the design adequacy and legality of the construction work by bringing the supervisor with the qualification under the Building Act and subordinate statutes at the site during the construction period of the instant case.
However, the defendant, not only neglected on-site supervision but also neglected on-site supervision, causing damage to the plaintiff due to the wind that does not supervise the defective construction works of the city.
As such, the Defendant could no longer conduct supervision upon the termination of the supervision period due to the completion of the instant construction works, which led to the impossibility of performing the supervision duties under the instant supervision contract.
Accordingly, the plaintiff, as the delivery of the complaint of this case, cancelled the supervision contract of this case and sought the return of the supervision fee of 35,000,000 won and interest in arrears already paid for restitution to the original state.
3. In a case where a supervisor conducts supervision, not at all, with the lapse of the period of supervision, but with the degree that the content of supervision is insufficient, the project owner may seek damages from the supervisor due to such defective supervision, separate from the fact that the project owner may seek damages from the supervisor, the said supervisor cannot claim the cancellation of the supervision agreement itself as a ground for non-performance of supervision.
As seen above, the Office has approved the use of the instant officetel which is the object of supervision.