beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.09.10 2020가단2270

공사대금

Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On June 20, 2016, June 30, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendants on the construction of a new house (hereinafter “instant construction”) among the new construction works on the land other than the wife E and 7 parcels, and the Plaintiff completed the construction. The Defendants paid KRW 24,00,000 among the construction cost of KRW 48,50,000 (excluding value-added tax) and did not repay the remainder of KRW 29,350,00 (= value-added tax of KRW 48,50,000).

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally obligated to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 29,350,000.

2. According to the written evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4 (including each number in the case of serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) of the judgment, it is recognized that the Plaintiff and the Defendants prepared a subcontract agreement on the instant construction work on June 20, 2016, and that the Plaintiff was issued a guaranty insurance policy for the performance of the instant construction work on January 24, 2017 by designating the insured as the Defendants.

However, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the overall purport of the statements and arguments in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 10, are as follows: (i) the Defendants were awarded a contract for a new construction of a detached house on the land, E in the wife population E and seven parcels from May 2, 2016 to July 1, 2016 to F; (ii) the F would be awarded a guarantee insurance contract under the name of the actual contractor; (iii) the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against F for the instant construction contract; and (iv) the Plaintiff was sentenced to a favorable judgment on December 11, 2018 (U.S. District Court Decision 2018Da2413). The Plaintiff appears to have received a subcontract from F, and there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that the instant construction contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendants.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion.