사해행위취소 등
1. The defendants' appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
(b).
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the judgment of the court of first instance as follows.
2. Additional matters to be determined;
A. Defendant C’s assertion ① In addition to the fees and wages for temporary materials during the discontinuance period of the instant construction, the expenses paid during the discontinuance period of the instant construction are additionally incurred due to the discontinuance of construction not attributable to Defendant C, and thus, the amount of damages ought to be deducted.
② Defendant C did not participate in the instant construction work after the discontinuance of the construction work, and the construction cost paid after the discontinuance of the construction work of this case is also incurred due to the discontinuance of the construction work without any cause attributable to Defendant C, and thus, should be deducted from the amount
③ Since the Plaintiff acquired KRW 30 million in return for the disposal of remaining timber at the construction site of this case, the amount shall also be deducted.
④ Defendant C should also deduct the wage of 8.5 million won paid to its father at his/her own expense on October 2010.
B. Determination: 1) The fact that the rent and wage for temporary materials paid during the discontinuance period of the instant construction was an essential cost for maintaining the foundation and managing the site until the commencement of the construction. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the remainder of the construction cost claimed by Defendant C was additionally incurred due to the discontinuance of the construction. Rather, the Plaintiff and Daelim Construction as seen earlier and the construction cost for the subcontract (730 million won) and the construction cost under the instant agreement (680 million won) and the construction cost under the instant agreement (680 million won), which was 50% higher at the time of the discontinuance of the instant construction, claim that the instant agreement is a contract for completing the construction under its responsibility within the scope of KRW 680 million.