beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.11 2014가합560965

손해배상(기)

Text

1. Defendant Samsung C&T Co., Ltd.: (a) KRW 48,00,000 and its amount from September 2, 2014 to August 11, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person operating a waterproof plant with the trade name of “C” and Samsung C&T (hereinafter “T”) is a company engaged in export and import business, overseas construction business, and overseas development business, and Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) is a company engaged in a waterproofing construction business.

B. Around August 2012, Samsung C&T awarded a contract for the roof waterproof construction work with the Russcamba Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Thago”), and C&T awarded a contract to the Plaintiff for the construction project that attempts to capture polybesium on the roof of the building during the construction project (hereinafter “instant construction”).

C. On October 2012, the Plaintiff, at first of October, 2012, went to sk immediately to carry out the instant construction, but the customs clearance of the machinery and equipment that the Plaintiff intended to carry into the Republic of Korea for construction (hereinafter “instant equipment”) was delayed.

Although the instant equipment arrives at the lower court on October 2012, 2012, the Plaintiff did not construct the instant equipment and returned to Korea without being left the instant equipment.

In April 2013, Samsung C&T awarded a contract to Defendant B for the construction work that Samsung C&T left to T&T, and Defendant B subcontracted the instant construction work to the Plaintiff by setting the construction period from May 15, 2013 to July 14, 2013, around April 16, 2013.

E. On October 3, 2013, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction, but the instant equipment was not carried out from Russia to Korea and remains there.

F. Meanwhile, on September 2, 2015, the first parent company merged Samsung C&T and changed its trade name into “T&T Co., Ltd.”

(hereinafter “Defendant Samsung Heavy Industries”). 【No dispute exists over the grounds for recognition”, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, witness E and F’s testimony, and party’s personal examination results against Defendant Samsung representative director.