beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.08.27 2014가단69616

인건비

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 30, 2013, the Defendant received a contract by setting the construction cost of KRW 517 million and the construction period from February 1, 2013 to July 30, 2013, which newly constructs urban-type residential housing on the ground of the land of Yeongdeungpo-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, Seoul, as the contract price for the construction of new urban-type residential housing.

B. During the foregoing construction, the Defendant subcontracted the steel works and the mold construction to Nonparty E, and the Plaintiff re-subcontracted the mold construction from the above E, and performed the said construction from March 15, 2013 to July 1, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of Gap evidence No. 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion sought to suspend the instant construction in accordance with Nonparty E’s waiver of the instant construction subcontracted by the Defendant during the middle of the construction, and the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff the insufficient labor cost of KRW 2.50,000 per square year to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant agreement”), under which the Plaintiff believed the said agreement, and completed the instant construction by resumeing it.

Therefore, according to the agreement of this case, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 20,927,000 won for personnel expenses payable to the plaintiff as well as damages for delay.

B. Therefore, we examine whether the Defendant agreed to pay personnel expenses to the Plaintiff at an ordinary rate of KRW 2,50,000 upon completion of the instant construction work, and the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings as a result of the commission to send documents to the Gangwon-gu Office of Employment and Labor of the Republic of Korea, and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not prepare separate documents regarding the instant agreement, and the Plaintiff filed a petition with the High-ro Labor and Labor on the ground that the Defendant did not pay the overdue money and valuables to the Plaintiff. In the instant petition case, the Plaintiff stated that “the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not clearly provide for the treatment of the instant construction directly with the Defendant.”