약정금
1. All appeals on the principal lawsuit and counterclaim by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be the principal lawsuit.
1. The reasons for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as follows: “C is present at the meeting of the conciliation intervenor” in Part 4 of Part 2 of Part 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and “C is present at the meeting of the conciliation intervenor” in Part 5 of Part 4, and “C is present at the meeting of the conciliation intervenor” in Part 5 of Part 5, and “C, August 24, 2014” shall be added to “C, August 24, 2014,” and “C,278,145” in Part 5, and “B,” shall be added to “B,” and “B,” in Part 5, the following and “B,” shall be added to Chapter 6:
In addition to the same content as Paragraph 7, the joint guarantor or joint guarantor of the obligation for the second subcontract price of this case shall be deemed to be "the joint guarantor or joint guarantor of the obligation for the second subcontract price of this case", and the 7th and 11th of the 7th 7th 7th 7th 7th "(the defendant shall not accept any claim for damages for delay claimed beyond the above recognition scope)" "(the defendant shall not accept any claim for damages for delay made by the defendant beyond the above recognition scope)" "(the defendant shall claim for the payment of damages for delay from the date after January 10, 2013 when the work was completed beyond the above recognition scope, but according to the above recognition facts, C may be known that the contract was made to pay the construction price within 10 days after the completion inspection. Thus, the defendant's claim for damages for delay exceeding the above recognition scope shall not be accepted)", and the plaintiff
Inasmuch as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, this is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
4) As can be seen, the Defendant is liable to pay KRW 84 million out of the construction cost of the first and second subcontracts to the Defendant by jointly and severally guaranteeing the obligation to pay the subcontract price to the Defendant under the first and second subcontracting contract of this case, and the Plaintiff, who is equivalent to the Defendant, is entitled to take over the obligation to pay KRW 84 million against the Defendant, according to the ratio of each party’s obligation to pay the subcontract price to C.