beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.03.31 2015나54777

임금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The bankrupt Party A is the Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) around July 2013.

(2) Defendant D, an agent of Defendant Company, is an internal director and an F apartment 192 household owned by the Defendant Company (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

2) Of the 12 households, the remodeling project for 12 households and the attached stuffing project for some households (hereinafter “instant construction”).

(2) Although Defendant D had no authority to conclude the instant construction contract on behalf of Defendant D, such as having Defendant D, a director in the company, take charge of the management of the instant apartment complex, selling the apartment complex, selling the apartment complex, etc., and having Defendant D actually performed the aforementioned duties while residing in the instant apartment site, and completed the construction work from September 1, 2013 to November 20, 2013, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay the remainder of KRW 2,7560,00,000, which is the remainder after subtracting a partial payment of KRW 1884,00,000 from the construction cost, to the Plaintiff, a trustee in bankruptcy, as a party to the instant construction contract.

Therefore, the defendant company bears the responsibility of expression agency under Article 126 of the Civil Act.

3) In addition, even if Defendant D entered into the instant construction contract with Defendant D without the power of representation, even though employees of the Defendant Company knew of the fact that Defendant A was conducting the instant construction work and that A was conducting the instant construction work, the Defendant Company implicitly ratified the instant construction contract between Defendant D and A. Thus, if Defendant D and A were not to be held liable for the Defendant Company, Defendant D entered into the contract as the representative of the Defendant Company, even though it entered into the contract.

참조조문