채무부존재확인
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;
1. On October 24, 2016, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion made a subcontract to the Defendant for reinforced concrete construction costs of KRW 5,566,562,00 for the apartment construction among the apartment construction works of the Kucheon-dong District Housing Association.
On February 1, 2018, the Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 5,304,50,000 according to the Defendant’s work progress.
In addition to the remaining construction cost of KRW 262,062,00, the Defendant asserted to the effect that there was an additional construction work due to a design change and demanded the Plaintiff to pay KRW 153,390,000 for the additional construction cost, but the additional construction cost according to a design change identified by the Plaintiff shall not exceed KRW 59,510,000.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks to confirm that the instant lawsuit does not have any additional construction cost exceeding KRW 59,510,000,000 for the Defendant as a result of the said design modification.
2. Determination:
A. The lawsuit for confirmation of relevant legal principles is permitted when it is the most effective and appropriate means to resolve the dispute, where the Plaintiff’s right or legal status is currently unstable and dangerous, and the judgment of confirmation is rendered.
(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da5640 Decided April 11, 200, and Supreme Court Decision 2015Da206492 Decided June 11, 2015). Lawsuits for confirmation of the existence of an obligation pending in a performance lawsuit do not have the benefit of confirmation (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Da22246 Decided July 24, 2001). The standard time for determining the existence of an interest in a lawsuit is the time when the fact-finding pleadings are concluded.
(See Supreme Court Decision 91Nu9329 delivered on October 27, 1992). B.
In full view of the contents of evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the Defendant brought an action against the Plaintiff seeking payment of KRW 272,108,000, including the construction cost of KRW 153,390,000 mentioned by the Plaintiff in the instant case, as the court 2018Gahap4663, during the course of the instant lawsuit seeking confirmation of non-existence of the obligation for additional construction cost, and the Plaintiff appears to have responded to this.
C. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff.