beta
(영문) 춘천지방법원원주지원 2019.07.25 2017가합5903

공사대금

Text

1. Defendant B Co., Ltd., C, D, and E shall be jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 228,000,000 and the aforementioned amount on January 1, 2017.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 18, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”) by setting the construction cost as KRW 228,00,000 (which shall be divided into October 1, 2016 and paid in November 11, 2016) (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. On August 2016, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction work.

C. On August 18, 2016, Defendant D agreed to guarantee the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the instant contract to the Plaintiff by Defendant C.

On October 20, 2016, Defendant E agreed to guarantee the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the instant contract price to the Plaintiff.

E. In addition, on the same day, Defendant A entered into a guarantee agreement (hereinafter “instant agreement”) on behalf of Defendant B Co., Ltd. (the former trade name is H Co., Ltd.; hereinafter “Defendant B”), stating that Defendant C will pay the Plaintiff the obligation to pay the construction cost of the instant contract to the Plaintiff viaout the period between November 30, 2016 and December 31, 2016 (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap evidence 2 through 4 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C, D, and E

A. According to the above facts, Defendant C, D, and E are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 228,000,000 and the damages for delay.

B. As to this, the above Defendants asserted to the effect that they did not have the obligation to pay the above construction cost to the Plaintiff, since Defendant B, the original office of the instant corporation, agreed to pay the said construction cost to the Plaintiff.

The evidence No. 2 is sufficient to acknowledge that the above Defendants agreed on the direct payment of construction cost, as alleged by the Defendants, even if the evidence No. 2 was written.