beta
(영문) 부산고등법원 2016.11.24 2015나56529

공사대금 등

Text

1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Grounds for the court's explanation concerning this case is set forth in the judgment of the court of first instance

(b) (2), (3) and (3);

B. (b) Except for the application of subsection (b) above, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment of the court of first instance No. 2 on the parts after being dried;

B. (2) In the event that an agreement on the unit cost of construction is made at the time of the contract for construction works, and if an agreement on the unit cost of construction works has been made based on the unit cost of construction works, it should be calculated on the basis of the unit cost of the contract for construction works, as it is generally recognized as identical to the original project in the case of quantitative construction works, such as an increase in the building area.

Meanwhile, in a case where only an agreement on the additional construction cost exists and there is no agreement on the method of calculation thereof, it is reasonable to view that there was an implied agreement to pay a reasonable amount of remuneration according to the content of the construction work, based on reasonable discretion, the court may determine the amount of the construction cost in consideration of all the circumstances, such as the scale and content of the construction work, expenses disbursed by the contractor, effort, time, circumstances leading to the conclusion of the contract, practices regarding the number of construction cost in the construction industry,

(B) With respect to the instant case, if the purport of the entire pleadings is added to the result of the fact finding as to the foregoing facts and evidence, and the fact finding as to appraiser E of the first instance trial, among the instant additional construction, the construction of the instant additional construction is a new construction of a building that was not reflected in the initial design. Since the said additional construction is recognized as constituting an independent facility, it cannot be deemed that the said additional construction is a mere quantitative additional construction.

On the other hand, there is no dispute between the parties to pay the additional construction cost, but on the specific method of calculation.