beta
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.12.06 2017나810

약정금

Text

1. At the request of an exchange change in the trial, the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the Appointed Party C Co., Ltd.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 11, 2013, the Selection Party: (a) made and delivered to D a payment agreement stating that “The unpaid amount: 120,000,000 won (whichever is KRW 92,00,000,000) shall be paid immediately after the completion of the construction work; (b) the Defendant signed the said payment agreement as a joint guarantor; and (c) on January 16, 2014, the Selection Party signed the said payment agreement with the guarantor that “The unpaid amount of the construction cost at E-Site (51,00,000, whichever is KRW 23,000,000, whichever is later) and the additional paid construction cost (which shall be KRW 40,000,000) shall be paid immediately after completion of the construction work,” and the Defendant signed the said agreement with the guarantor.

(hereinafter referred to as "each payment agreement of this case"). (b) The payment agreement of this case is referred to in the above two payment agreements.

D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “instant lawsuit”) filed a claim for a contract amount of KRW 160,00,000 against the Defendant and the Appointor under the U.S. District Court 2014Gahap1955, “The Defendant and the Appointor jointly are jointly and severally liable to pay KRW 160,00,000 under each of the instant payment agreements (i.e., KRW 120,000,000), which was repaid by the Appointor to D, shall be deducted from KRW 50,422,50, and the Plaintiff (12,80,000) and F (8,80,000) shall file a claim for the construction payment with the Appointor and the Defendant as a separate lawsuit. Accordingly, the Defendant shall be jointly and severally liable to pay KRW 87,977,50,00 to D” (hereinafter referred to as “instant lawsuit”).

(2) On March 13, 2015, the above court paid KRW 31,00,000 to D by April 30, 2015, with respect to “1. The Defendant and the appointed parties jointly and severally, until April 30, 2015,” and

2. Since the cost of equipment sought against the Plaintiff, the F, and the Defendant is excluded from that of the above paragraph 1, it will be resolved separately by the Appointor and the Defendant.