채권조사확정재판에 대한 이의의 소
1. The Seoul Rehabilitation Court (Seoul Rehabilitation Court) authorize the final claim inspection judgment No. 2014da1689 dated December 17, 2018.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a company established for the purpose of cutting, embankinging and construction, excavation works, earth-to-soil and gravel works, etc., and the Defendant is a company established for the purpose of civil engineering, construction, road packing, electricity, machinery construction, contract work, steel materials installation work, etc.
B. The defendant was awarded a contract with C to build a new D Apartment.
As of June 3, 201, the Plaintiff agreed to accept the contract price for reinforced concrete construction works among the above apartment construction works (hereinafter “instant construction works”), and concluded each subcontract agreement (total construction contract amount, total amount, KRW 827,81,800, and construction period, from June 3, 2011 to July 31, 2012) with respect to reinforced concrete construction works among the above apartment construction works, with the Defendant as of June 7, 2011. As of June 7, 2011, the contract price of two sections among the above apartment construction works was KRW 4,407,494,80, and construction period was from June 7, 201 to July 31, 2012.
C. On July 31, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant are as follows.
The contract amount for the part of the section was changed to December 31, 2012 during the period of construction, the contract amount was changed to 4,740,851,000, and the contract amount was changed to 4,701,226,000, and the construction period was changed to December 31, 2012 (total construction contract amount was 9,42,07,000 won).
(b) Each of the above subcontracts and each of the above subcontracts is referred to as the "instant subcontract", respectively.
On August 25, 2014, the Seoul Central District Court rendered a decision to commence rehabilitation procedures with the Seoul Central District Court 2014hap146.
In the rehabilitation procedure against the defendant, the plaintiff reported the additional construction cost of KRW 765,659,579 as a rehabilitation claim. The defendant's administrator raised an objection to the plaintiff's reported claim, and the plaintiff is Seoul Rehabilitation Court.