손해배상(기)
1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) from January 12, 2012 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff Co., Ltd.) Company A and its amount of KRW 273,108,228.
1. Basic facts (the combination of a principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed to exist);
A. On May 29, 2009, the Plaintiff constituted a joint supply and demand company with Defendant A, and received part of the contract the F new construction project from the Public Procurement Service affiliated with Defendant A (hereinafter “instant construction project”), the contract amount of KRW 2,150,00,00,000, the total contract amount of KRW 16,475,431,000,000, the date of commencement, June 3, 2009, the date of completion, June 3, 2009, and December 30, 2009 (Provided, That the period of construction: 210 days from the commencement of the construction, 210 days from the commencement of the construction, 720 days from the commencement of the construction, 0.1% of the contract amount, general conditions for the construction project, and the letter of
B. Defendant Republic of Korea entrusted the instant construction to the Public Procurement Service. On June 5, 2009, the Public Procurement Service concluded a contract with Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) to supervise the construction of the instant construction and to supervise the contracting authority on behalf of the contracting authority.
C. Defendant E is an employee affiliated with Defendant B, who was stationed in the instant construction site on behalf of Defendant B and was in general in charge of the supervision, supervision, supervision, etc. of the overall construction work (amended from February 26, 2010 to G). Defendant C and D are public officials belonging to the Public Procurement Service, Defendant C are those in charge of the instant construction work, and Defendant D is the head of the construction management team.
The Plaintiff and Defendant A, even after June 3, 2009, on the date of commencement of the instant construction project, shall be subject to the same year.
7. Until 14.14. The distribution of advance payment and the conclusion of the joint operation agreement cannot be seen as identical opinions. From July 9, 2009 to October 20 of the same year, Defendant B and the Public Procurement Service urged the Plaintiff and Defendant A to enter into a joint contract execution agreement as soon as possible and to establish a single plan for the advanced construction project as delayed.
E. On September 9, 2009, the Plaintiff deemed that Defendant B delayed air with respect to H’s air-type, rain, and soil removal after the commencement of the instant construction work, but Defendant B was on September 10, 2009.