중재판정취소 청구의 소
1. As to the case of D Heavy Financial Resources Arbitration E between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant, the said Arbitration Board stated in the attached Form as of December 1, 2017.
1. Basic facts
A. On January 9, 2014, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant subcontracted to the Defendant the installation works of machinery/ boiler-3 (2A) among the G Corporation contracted by the Plaintiffs from F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant boiler installation works”). On September 22, 2014, the Plaintiffs entered into a contract to subcontract the Defendant for the installation works of machinery/ boiler-1 (A) among the instant boiler installation works.
(hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant contract”). (b)
The instant contract provides for the following provisions (hereinafter “instant dispute settlement provisions”) with respect to cases where disputes arise between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant.
Article 31 (Objection and Dispute Settlement) (1) Where there is a dispute in the interpretation of matters not specified in this contract and individual contract or in the interpretation of the contract, the plaintiffs and the defendant shall comply with other written materials and, if not, settle it through mutual consultation.
(2) When an agreement under paragraph (1) is not reached, an application for mediation may be filed with the construction dispute mediation committee under Article 69 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, or the H council under Article 24 of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act, or an application for mediation with an arbitration institution established under other Acts
C. As a result of the settlement of the instant contract, there was a dispute regarding the additional construction cost. On July 13, 2016, the Defendant filed an application with the Drbitral Board for arbitration seeking payment of KRW 35,97,55,211 against the Plaintiffs and damages for delay (D Heavy Resources Arbitration E). Accordingly, the Plaintiffs filed a written reply with the Defendant claiming the rejection of the Defendant’s application for arbitration by asserting the absence of the arbitration agreement around September 2016.
On December 1, 2017, the Drbitral Tribunal rejected the Plaintiffs’ defenses prior to the merits and rendered an arbitral award in the same manner as the attached Form (hereinafter “instant arbitral award”) while the arbitration agreement between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant is valid.
[Ground of recognition] dispute.