beta
(영문) 수원지방법원안양지원 2020.08.13 2019가단107683

공사대금

Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff’s assertion is the Plaintiff: (a) drafted on October 16, 2017 a stone construction contract with E and construction cost of KRW 180,00,000 with respect to the new construction of a row house, which is the client D and contractor E (hereinafter “E”); (b) C, the Defendant’s actual representative, led the instant contract; (c) C affixed the corporate seal of E in the instant contract; and (d) the Defendant is the person who entered into the instant contract with E and entered into the remaining contractor or E subcontract after the waiver of the construction; and therefore, (c) the actual party to the instant contract is the Defendant actually operated by C.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the construction cost of KRW 74,800,000 and damages for delay that are not paid to the plaintiff.

The defendant did not conclude a contract with the plaintiff.

Judgment

Whether the Defendant is a party to the instant contract constitutes a matter of interpreting the intent of the party involved in the contract.

The interpretation of a declaration of intent is to clearly determine the objective meaning that the parties have given to the act of expression, and where the contents of a contract are written in writing, which is a disposal document, the objective meaning that the parties have given to the act of expression shall be reasonably interpreted according to the contents written in writing, regardless of the internal intent of the parties. In this case, if the objective meaning of the text is clear, unless there are special circumstances, the existence and contents of the declaration of intention shall be acknowledged.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da44471, Nov. 29, 2012). According to the respective evidence Nos. 1 and 8, the other party who entered into a contract with the Plaintiff on the grounds of the conclusion of the contract in this case is E., and the other party to the contract in this case regardless of the above language.