손해배상(기)
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.
The defendant.
1. Basic facts
A. On October 17, 2013, the Defendant: (a) determined and subcontracted the construction cost of F.C.U. COVER Corporation (hereinafter “the instant construction work”) with panch panch panch lives attached to straw; (b) KRW 117,908,000 (excluding value-added tax) to the Plaintiff on October 17, 2013.
(hereinafter “instant construction contract”). B.
Since then, the Defendant demanded to modify the design of the instant construction project, while the Plaintiff was performing construction work in accordance with the modified design, and requested the Defendant to adjust the unit price following the design modification, but no agreement was reached between the original Defendant on the increase of the construction price.
C. On May 9, 2014, the Defendant re-subcontracted the instant construction work to Sungwon Co., Ltd. with the construction cost of KRW 141,90,000.
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 8, 13, 14 (including each number for those with several numbers), Eul evidence 1, or the purport of the whole pleadings]
2. The assertion and judgment
A. (1) The plaintiff asserted that the construction work of this case was carried out by the defendant, once the construction work of this case was carried out as soon as the construction work of this case was urgent, and the construction work of this case was carried out, such as manufacturing presses, which are the materials of the F.C.U.U. COVER construction, according to the revised design. However, the defendant excluded the plaintiff and subcontracted the construction work of this case to Sung Won-young Co., Ltd. as the result, since the execution of the construction work of this case was impossible due to the defendant's fault, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages caused by default or tort
(2) As to this, the Defendant demanded an excessive increase in the construction cost on the ground of a design change, and ultimately, unilaterally waives the construction work in order not to reach an agreement on the increase in the construction cost.