(영문) 창원지방법원진주지원 2014.05.22 2013가단12224

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 창원지방법원진주지원 2014.05.22 2013가단12224

채무부존재확인

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 22, 2013, the Plaintiff drafted a subcontract agreement (Evidence A 1) for the remodeling project for the Embel located in F and Jinju-si D (hereinafter “instant construction”).

B. Examining the main contents of the above contract, ① the contract amount is KRW 480 million; the contract amount is KRW 100 million; the contract amount is KRW 200 million; the first intermediate payment is KRW 200 million; and the second intermediate payment is paid KRW 100 million; and the contract period is paid according to the nature and form; ② the construction period is from April 29, 2013 to August 29, 2013; ③ the contractor is the Plaintiff and the contractor (contractor) is the contracting party, and the contractor is the Plaintiff and the contractor (contractor) is the “G”).

Meanwhile, under the trade name of G, while the name of the representative director H is written, a seal, such as the official seal of G or H, is affixed, and only the name of “F” and the seal of “F” are affixed under the name of H.

(F) The F is not an officer of G, and is not granted the power of representation in connection with the instant construction contract, and is prepared with the Plaintiff and the said subcontract to lend the name of G to carry out the construction work.

After the completion of the above contract, the Plaintiff remitted the down payment of KRW 50,000 to the Agricultural Cooperative Account of G, and G was informed through F through the fact that the contract of this case was not concluded due to the failure to conclude the construction contract of this case, and the Plaintiff and G did not conclude the construction subcontract.

After that, the Plaintiff and F had decided to proceed with the construction work in direct payment to the construction business operators, and the Plaintiff and F paid directly the construction cost exceeding KRW 500,000 from May 22, 2013 to September 30, 2013 by the Plaintiff in direct payment of the construction cost in excess of KRW 500,000,000 from May 22, 2013 to September 30, 2013.

The Plaintiff is the Corporation of this case to F.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원진주지원 2014.05.22 2014가단1504

-대전지방법원 논산지원 2014.07.29 2013고단554

-대전지방법원 홍성지원 2015.04.15 2015고단18 (1)

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.16 2014고단7088

-수원지방법원 2019.09.05 2017가단525278