채권조사확정재판에 대한 이의의 소
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. Basic facts
A. On June 29, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant on September 30, 2012, stipulating that the total construction cost of KRW 2,057,00,000 and the date of completion shall be determined as of September 30, 2012 (hereinafter “instant plant”).
(B) Around September 2012 and around October 2012, the completion date of the construction was changed to November 30, 2012 through two changes agreements.
On March 6, 2013, the Plaintiff was notified by the Jinju-si that an application for restoration of mountainous districts following the conversion of mountainous districts for the establishment of the instant electric power plants and private roads (hereinafter referred to as “instant restoration works”) and for completion inspection should be completed by September 6, 2013.
(B) The deadline for application for restoration work and completion inspection has been extended by September 6, 2014). (c)
On the other hand, on March 12, 2014, the Defendant applied for commencement of rehabilitation procedures to the Seoul Rehabilitation Court 2014hap55 and received a decision on March 21, 2014.
(1) The Plaintiff reported the rehabilitation claim to the Defendant, asserting that “The Defendant has a rehabilitation claim equivalent to KRW 239,900,000 of the expenses incurred in the instant construction work, as part of the obligation to complete the instant construction work pursuant to the instant construction contract,” and that “The Plaintiff has a rehabilitation claim equivalent to KRW 239,90,000,000 of the expenses incurred in the instant construction work.” The custodian raised an objection to the instant rehabilitation procedure in full due to the absence of the obligation.
Accordingly, on September 22, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for the final claim inspection judgment with the Defendant’s administrator as Seoul Rehabilitation Court 2014da1359, and the said court rendered a final claim inspection judgment on November 13, 2018 (hereinafter “final claim inspection judgment”) that “the Plaintiff’s rehabilitation claim against the Defendant does not exist” (hereinafter “instant final claim inspection judgment”) and filed the instant lawsuit against the Plaintiff.
E. The rehabilitation procedure of this case was completed on April 28, 2020, and the defendant on May 20, 2020.