손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the facts is as follows, except for the addition of Article 4(2)4 of the Subcontract Act following the fourth 8th tier of the judgment of the first instance, and therefore, it is identical to the corresponding column of the judgment of the first instance. Thus, this part is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act
4. Fixing a subcontract price by deceiving a subcontractor by causing an error in the terms of transaction, such as the volume of order, or by presenting an estimate or a false estimate of another project operator, and using such means;
2. The Defendant’s assertion as to the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim is not applicable at the time of adding the conditions of the first and second exclusion, and the first and second exclusion conditions from the exception conditions were applied in a lump sum. The Defendant’s act constitutes “determination of unfair subcontract consideration” under Article 4(2)1, 4, 5, and 8 of the Subcontract Act, and thereby, the Plaintiff suffered damage that reduces service fees during the period from May to May 2015, 2017.
Therefore, the Defendant should pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the reduced amount compared to the service fee for the year 2014 during the pertinent period as compensation for damages caused by the determination of unfair subcontract consideration.
Annual Fees for the Year 2008 895,452,870 won for the year 2008 903,105,898 won for the year 2012 706,061,93 won for the year 2009 880,158,372 won for the year 916,95,61 won for the year 2017 294,671,300 won for the year 2010 93,909,342 won for the year 2014 909,127,902 won for the year 201 91,51,51,448 won for the year 2015 759,286 won for the year 2015
3. Determination
A. Determination 1 as to the conditions of exclusion from the first and second occasions is based on the following: (a) without applying the conditions of exclusion from the second and second instances at the time when the Defendant added the conditions of exclusion from the second and second instances, the Plaintiff calculated and paid service fees in the same manner as the previous cases; and (b) added the conditions of exclusion from the instant case, and “duplicates, vacant household, termination