logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2021.01.13 2020나17633
물품대금
Text

The judgment of the first instance is revoked.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

All costs of litigation shall be borne by the plaintiff.

claim. The purport of the claim.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company established for cement manufacturing and selling, and manufacturing and selling cement products. The Defendant is a company established for the purpose of constructing, maintaining, managing and operating cement development project facilities and its related business.

B. On September 23, 2016, the Defendant awarded a contract to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) for the construction of sports facilities for C and residents. D, on August 3, 2017, subcontracted the construction of sports facilities for C and residents to E during the said construction work (hereinafter “instant subcontract”).

(c)

From September 7, 2017 to December 31, 2017, the Plaintiff supplied ready-mixeds to be used for the instant subcontracted work to E in accordance with the E’s order. On December 31, 2017, the Plaintiff discontinued the supply of ready-mixeds, as the price for ready-mixeds unpaid to the Plaintiff was at KRW 146,866,40,00.

(d)

Han Part uses advance payment received from D on the last day of 2017 for other construction than the instant subcontracted construction, and is unable to pay the construction cost and material cost to the re-contractors, material equipment, labor service companies, etc. (hereinafter “re-contractors, etc.”) of the instant subcontracted construction including the Plaintiff, and E’s creditors were subject to provisional attachment or seizure and collection order (hereinafter “provisional attachment, etc.”).

E. When the subcontracted project of this case was discontinued due to the above circumstances, the defendant obtained consent from E to pay the price directly to the subcontractor, etc., and the defendant sent an official document to E.

In addition, upon the request of the subcontractor, etc. to pay the price, E has to resume the construction by directly paying the price to the subcontractor, etc., and the plaintiff also continued to supply the price to E.

F. The Plaintiff on August 1, 2018

arrow