공사대금
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 40,208,40 and 6% per annum from September 1, 2017 to April 20, 2020.
1. The fact of recognition that Defendant B borrowed the name of Defendant C’s “D” and subcontracted part of the building of reinforced concrete structure (hereinafter “instant construction”) to the Plaintiff, upon receiving the supply of and demand for reinforced concrete building construction from Nonparty E Co., Ltd. among “F and six lots of housing complex construction on Seopopo City, and one commercial building construction on the third floor on the lot of land other than G, the third floor size on the lot of land.”
The Plaintiff completed the instant construction work around August 2017.
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings]
2. The Defendants’ joint and several liability Gap evidence No. 1-4 was sent by Defendant B, and even if so, Defendant B is recognized as the actual operator of “D”.
Therefore, Defendant B is a real business owner, and Defendant C should be jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 24 of the Commercial Act as the nominal owner.
3. The Plaintiff asserts that the construction cost of the instant case is KRW 358,958,400 (747.83 square x 480,00) since the construction area of the said case’s construction cost is total of KRW 747.83 square x 480,00.
However, Defendant C asserts that the total construction cost is KRW 335,880,000 as the total construction cost is KRW 335,880,00, since the total construction cost is KRW 699,75.75.
In order to calculate labor contract cost in the labor contract, the actual construction should be limited to the extent, unless there is a special agreement.
According to the appraiser H’s appraisal result, the Plaintiff’s additional construction work may be recognized while changing the area of 2.96 square meters from the first floor, 2.81 square meters from the second floor, and Jdong from the Ata to Btain.62 square meters from the 6.75 square meters.
In addition, there is no dispute between the parties that the expansion area of each balcony in the KLM consent is 8.57 square meters and 5.08 square meters in each balcony with NO consent.
Therefore, the total area of the instant construction project executed by the Plaintiff is 747.83 square meters as alleged by the Plaintiff, and the total construction cost is 358,958,400 won.
On the other hand, the defendants are the defendants.