beta
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2019.09.19 2018가합409533

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 11, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff have a tourist hotel and its ancillary facilities on the ground of 5,291.01 square meters in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant building”).

2) Newly constructed (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction”)

2) The Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant on March 8, 2013 based on the service contract described in the foregoing paragraph (1) that provides that the construction of the instant building shall be KRW 79,503,60,000 (including value-added tax) and the construction period from March 11, 2013 to June 30, 2014 (hereinafter “the instant first construction contract”).

A) Around that time, the Defendant concluded the E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) with the same majority shareholder or representative director as the Plaintiff.

3) The contract providing for a subcontract for part of the primary construction of this case to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant subcontract”).

On the other hand, on March 11, 2013, the Defendant concluded an agreement between the Plaintiff and E setting the construction cost, scope of construction, etc. of the instant first construction contract and the subcontract agreement (hereinafter “instant first agreement”).

3) The Plaintiff, the Defendant, and E were in conflict of opinion regarding the Defendant’s selection of the subcontractor, scope of construction, and advance payment. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s major shareholder and E’s representative director (at present, the Plaintiff’s representative director is the Plaintiff’s representative director), around June 19, 2013, was threatened with the Defendant’s employees at the Defendant’s office.

The plaintiff, the defendant, and the plaintiff, the defendant, and the Eul will modify the terms of 50% of the total amount of the contract for the construction of this case as of June 26, 2013 to the defendant, and to divide the remainder of 50% into E, and to abolish the agreement with the existing contract for the first construction of this case.