beta
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2017.10.19 2016가합8227

공사대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a company that aims at the housing construction business, etc., and the defendant is a company that aims at the construction business.

B. On October 9, 2015, between C and D on behalf of the Plaintiff and D on behalf of the Defendant, a contract was concluded between C and D on the construction of Pyeongtaek-si E neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “instant building”) with the content that C will perform the construction works on a part (including value-added tax) of the construction cost of KRW 715,000,000 (including disputes over the scope of the construction).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 3 (including the branch number)

2. The parties' arguments and the issues of this case

A. The content of the said contract is that C performs the molding construction of the building of this case, and that the Plaintiff receives KRW 715,000,000 from the Defendant.

B) On March 30, 2016, C completed the construction work under the above contract and handed over the construction site to the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost unpaid under the above contract (i.e., KRW 351,04,000 (= KRW 715,000,000 - KRW 363,956,00) and damages for delay.

2) Defendant A) The said contract performed reinforced concrete construction and mold construction of the instant building by C, and the Plaintiff was paid the construction cost of KRW 715,000,000 from the Defendant.

However, on November 2, 2015, a contract was concluded between C and the Defendant, which represented the Plaintiff on November 2, 2015, stating that “C only performs the mold work under the aforesaid contract, and the construction cost is changed to KRW 317,00,000.”

B. C was unable to complete the construction by suspending the molding construction of the instant building on April 2016.

Even if not, the defendant has already repaid the construction price exceeding 317,00,000 won.

Therefore, the defendant has no obligation to respond to the plaintiff's request.

B. The instant case.