공사대금
1. The judgment of the first instance is modified as follows.
A. Of the instant lawsuit, KRW 18,314,201 and its related thereto are November 21, 2018.
1. Reduction of the amount of a claim based on the same claim, which is divided in quantity to determine the legitimacy of the lawsuit, is interpreted as partial withdrawal of the lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Da46758, Jul. 9, 2004). The Plaintiff sought payment of the accrued construction cost of KRW 3,934,70,000 and damages for delayed payment thereof, and the purport of the claim on March 13, 2020 after the first instance judgment was rendered, and the purport of the claim was reflected in the application for change of the cause of the claim in the purport of the claim and the purport of the claim based on reflecting the Defendant’s appropriation for payment following the Defendant’s partial repayment, and the amount of damages for delay was reduced to KRW 2,016,16,373 and the amount of damages for the claim was reduced to KRW 2,034,480,574, Oct. 30, 2020.
Since the plaintiff partly withdrawn a lawsuit by reducing the purport of the claim after the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered, it is impossible to bring the same lawsuit in accordance with Article 267 (2) of the Civil Procedure Act.
Therefore, among the instant lawsuits, KRW 18,314,201 (i.e., KRW 2,034,480,574 - KRW 2,016,166,373) and the amount of delayed damages therefrom should be dismissed as it is in violation of the prohibition of re-instigation.
2. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the part of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition of the term “BH” under the text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning for the court’s explanation is the same as that for the part of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition of the term “BH” under the text of 5 pages of the judgment of the
[Judgment]
F. On April 2, 2020, the Defendant deposited KRW 1,417,227,548 with the Seoul Central District Court Decision No. 7704, a deposit of KRW 1,417,227,548 with the Plaintiff on April 2, 202, and the Plaintiff accepted the deposit acceptance on May 4, 2020.
[Judgment]
3. Determination as to the claim for the unpaid construction cost
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion is based on the following circumstances, and the Defendant settled the amount exceeding KRW 15.82 billion for the Plaintiff under the instant contract and the instant modified contract and the amount exceeding the said construction cost, KRW 786,959,314.