계약보증금지급청구권
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
The court's explanation concerning this case shall be based on the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance.
In addition to the deletion of a claim and addition of a judgment in a trial as set forth in the following paragraph 2, the reasoning of the judgment in the first instance is the same as that of the judgment in the first instance.
In the process of the construction of the instant case, the Kail Construction, upon the Plaintiff’s request, has increased the construction cost by either modifying a part of the design or performing additional construction works, and the Plaintiff requested the adjustment of the construction cost, but the Plaintiff rejected it unfairly.
In addition, the statement of the cost of construction project attached to the notice of tender and the general specifications are not stated in the unit price, but only the total amount of the construction cost is stated.
The Kail Construction, with the knowledge that the normal unit price is reflected in the total amount of the above construction cost, was tendered by the successful bid rate.
However, the Plaintiff calculated the total construction cost on the basis of an amount less than the appropriate unit price.
In other words, although the plaintiff should have applied the base unit price and fem in July 2014, the plaintiff applied the second half of 2013 performance unit price, and the labor cost applied the first half of 2014 unit price in the year of 2014, and the quantity of some items was arbitrarily lowered.
Ultimately, the Plaintiff calculated the total construction cost on the basis of the amount less than the reasonable unit price with knowledge that the Plaintiff is an appropriate unit price and lower than the reasonable unit price.
This is the same as the Plaintiff provided a detailed statement of construction cost by mistakenly stating the quantity of construction cost. Therefore, the cary construction demanded a change in the contract considering the change in the construction content, but the Plaintiff rejected it unfairly.
Therefore, the Kail Construction will suspend construction.
Therefore, the Plaintiff’s termination of the instant construction contract is unlawful, since it is reasonable to suspend the Kail Construction and complete the construction work within the completion date.
The instant construction contract.