공사대금
1. The Plaintiff, Defendant C, D, and E respectively, and each of them from March 16, 2013. < Amended by Act No. 11718, Mar. 16, 2013>
1. In full view of the facts without dispute over the basic facts and the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence Nos. 4, 15, 16 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Eul evidence No. 8, the defendants can recognize that the main industry development company (hereinafter the "main industry development company") newly built in the Fil-gu in Busan Metropolitan Government (hereinafter the "the apartment of this case") is part of G main apartment, which was sold in lots and completed the registration of ownership transfer as shown in the attached Form.
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion principal development suspended the construction of the instant apartment on October 16, 2009 due to the wind that had been newly constructed the instant apartment, and the construction of the instant apartment was difficult to move into the said apartment on October 16, 2009. The Defendants designated Defendant B as the party and Defendant C, D, and E’s agent, and ordered the Plaintiff to complete the construction of 15 items, including inside the parts owned by the Plaintiff, electrical construction, etc. (hereinafter “the completion of the instant construction”) or the completion of the construction of 15 million won per household. Accordingly, the Plaintiff completed the said construction until December 2009. Accordingly, the Defendants are liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 15 million (30 million in possession of two households) and damages for delay.
B. Defendant B’s assertion by the Defendants only requested the Plaintiff to complete the construction of Nos. 901 (Defendant B’s ownership, No. 2), and No. 1101 (Attachment No. 3) among the instant apartment buildings, but did not request the Plaintiff to complete the construction. The Plaintiff did not complete the construction, and the Plaintiff did not complete the construction. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with.
(The Defendant did not claim in this case for the reason that the damages for delay in surrender are being disputed in Busan District Court 2013Na16388, which is a related lawsuit. (See the preparatory brief dated September 10, 2013.)
End.