beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.11.30 2017나110388

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

Basic Facts

Around June 2014, Defendant Han-ro Plastic Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) entered into a contract on construction works with Defendant Korea Railroad Corporation (hereinafter “Defendant Corporation”) regarding the interior works of the Daejeon Facilities and Equipment Office (hereinafter “the construction works of the office of this case”).

On September 15, 2014, the Plaintiff Company, a corporation established for the purpose of reinforced concrete construction business, soil construction business, etc., concluded a subcontract with the Defendant Company on September 15, 2014 by entering into an agreement with the Defendant Company on the construction cost of KRW 56,006,50 (including value-added tax), September 15, 2014, and September 30, 2014 as of the date of commencement of the instant office contracted by the Defendant Company.

(2) On October 1, 2014, the Defendant Company entered into an additional agreement between the Defendant Company and the Plaintiff Company on October 1, 2014, to include the instant construction work in the content of the instant construction contract by stipulating that the instant construction work should be included in KRW 6,30,00 (excluding value-added tax) in addition to the instant construction work. The Defendant Company entered into an additional agreement with the Plaintiff Company on October 15, 2014, to include the instant construction work in the content of the instant construction project, including two relocations and safety fences (hereinafter “instant lighting works”).

Plaintiff

Pursuant to the instant construction contract, on October 28, 2014, the Company leased 1, Daho, including articles, from B, and commenced the instant lighting work. The Company, as its employee, D completed one of the instant lighting poles under the direction and supervision of E, a working group leader of the Plaintiff Company, and thereafter, excavated work on its own in order to remove the remainder of the utility poles between E and B, having the working tools in the warehouse.