공사대금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On September 27, 2016, the Defendant awarded a contract to C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) with the Seoul Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Construction Corporation for the Construction of New Buildings (hereinafter “instant Construction”) for KRW 850,00,000, and the period from September 27, 2016 to February 10, 2017.
B. However, C failed to complete the instant construction by February 10, 2017, which is the agreed construction deadline, and extended the completion date by February 28, 2017, March 28, 2017, by March 28, 2017, and by May 10, 2017, respectively. The said building obtained approval for use on August 23, 2017.
C. From September 28, 2016 to August 14, 2017, the Defendant paid C KRW 627,00,000 in total as the construction price of the instant case.
On December 11, 2017, the Plaintiff lent KRW 90,000,00 to C, and C, on January 15, 2018, transferred to the Plaintiff the remaining claim equivalent to KRW 200,000,000 out of the instant construction cost claim against the Defendant of C (hereinafter “transfer of claim”), and notified the Defendant thereof.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 4, 8, Eul 1-1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion C completed the instant construction and there is KRW 223,00,000,000 for the remainder of the construction cost, and the Plaintiff acquired the remainder of the construction cost from C, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 90,000,000, out of which is due.
Preliminaryly, the Plaintiff leased C KRW 90,000,000 to C, and C is insolvent, and thus, C seeks payment of KRW 90,000,000 out of the remaining construction cost in subrogation of C.
3. The defendant's judgment on the defense prior to the merits claimed that the remaining claim for construction work was transferred for the purpose of having the plaintiff conduct litigation, and that the assignment of claims in this case is null and void.
Article 6 of the Trust Act shall apply mutatis mutandis, even if the assignment of claims does not constitute a trust under the Trust Act, so it shall be null and void, and the litigation shall be conducted.