beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.11.06 2014나21944

공사대금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) that constitutes the following amount ordering payment with respect to a counterclaim.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who engages in metal treatment business, etc. under the trade name of “B,” and the Defendant is a company that manufactures industrial machinery automation systems, etc.

On June 26, 2012, the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract from the Defendant for the extension of the term “small Car” and the term “construction of the return equipment (hereinafter referred to as the “instant construction”) of the Gwangju Factory, Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Abandoned Automobile”) that the Defendant had been performing construction by being awarded a contract with the Non-Party Seosan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Shansan Industries Co., Ltd.”).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant subcontracted construction contract”) B.

The agreed total construction cost at the time of the instant construction contract is KRW 90 million (excluding value-added tax), and the Defendant paid KRW 18 million to the Plaintiff on the day of the contract as the down payment.

In addition, the Defendant paid the intermediate payment of KRW 45 million to the Plaintiff on August 21, 2012.

C. During the construction process under the instant construction contract, the Plaintiff suspended the construction work on August 30, 2012 due to the occurrence of a horse inspection related to additional construction works, etc. between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

Afterwards, the Plaintiff received KRW 50 million as additional construction cost from the Madsan season around July 2013, when the instant lawsuit was pending.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 11, 12, and 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. While the Plaintiff asserted that the construction work of this case was carried out by the Plaintiff, the Defendant demanded additional construction that had no content of the original construction contract of this case to the Plaintiff. Since the Plaintiff demanded additional construction costs, the Defendant unilaterally terminated the construction contract without paying the said costs, and the Plaintiff suspended the construction work.

Therefore, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 8,1960,000 won, such as manufacturing expenses paid by the plaintiff due to the construction, to the workers of the sub-contractor, 35,90,000 won, and the defendant.