beta
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2014.05.08 2013가합32550

공사대금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 200,000.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3.Paragraph 1.

Reasons

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 6 as to the cause of the claim, Eul entered into a contract for construction works to contract for the extension and repair of the building for reinforced concrete building in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter "the building in this case") with the defendant on July 31, 2012, with the construction period of KRW 440 million on July 31, 2012, and C entered into the said extension and repair works including additional construction works equivalent to KRW 25 million. The defendant completed the said extension and repair works. The defendant paid KRW 20 million out of the total construction cost of KRW 465 million, the defendant paid KRW 45 million to Eul (hereinafter "the construction price in this case") from April 25, 2013, < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 24545, Apr. 25, 2013; Presidential Decree No. 24507, Apr. 25, 2013>

5.1. Notification of the assignment of claims of this case to the defendant by content-certified mail, and the same month;

3. It is recognized that the above notice has been delivered to the defendant.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay 200 million won out of the construction price of this case to the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances.

The defendant asserts that the assignment of claims in this case is null and void as a litigation trust, and the defendant asserts that the assignment of claims in this case is null and void since the plaintiff, who is an employee C, acquired the claim in this case for the purpose of litigation without the cause of the assignment of claims.

As to this, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant claim was transferred to the Defendant for repayment of the loan claim, and that the instant claim assignment is valid.

Judgment

In case where the assignment, etc. of a claim is mainly carried out for the purpose of procedural acts, even if the assignment of claim does not fall under a trust under the Trust Act, Article 7 of the Trust Act is applied mutatis mutandis, so it shall be null and void, and it shall