(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.02.13 2013가합12490

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.02.13 2013가합12490

용역대금등

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Determination on the claim for service costs related to building construction works

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Construction of a new building on the land of Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul owned by the Defendant and the Defendant (hereinafter “new construction of this case”)

(2) In relation to the Plaintiff’s construction work, the Plaintiff entered into a contract on March 14, 2012, providing services, including the construction cost, and the main service contract on March 20, 2012, with the content that the Plaintiff would receive the payment for the construction work from the contractor upon the appointment of the contractor and supervision. In addition to the performance of all the services under the service contract, the Plaintiff was engaged in the business of transferring trees, etc., in addition to the performance of all the services. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to enter into a new contract with the Plaintiff and pay the remainder of KRW 11,485 million, including the service cost added to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendant merely entered into the new contract with the Plaintiff as the representative director, as otherwise alleged by the Plaintiff, with the terms and conditions of the contract for the new construction work.

B. Determination 1) The most essential evidence among the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff to prove that the Plaintiff was a party to a contract with the Defendant regarding the instant new construction project and that the content of the contract is a service contract, not a service contract, is the content of the indication of the part of the sign of delegation and cost statement (No. 3-1) that the Plaintiff asserted that it was prepared on March 20, 2012 between the Defendant and the Defendant. However, the form and method of preparing the part (the Plaintiff stated its content as its acceptance).

)the location of the seal imprint (not the location of the seal imprint generally affixed at the time of preparation of the contract);

(E) The Defendant issued a certificate of personal seal impression to the Plaintiff (E on March 20, 2012).

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2015.01.21 2014나18645

-대구지방법원 2020.07.24 2019가단142432

-서울고등법원 2014.09.04 2014노1398

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.05.01 2013고합868

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.20 2016나53144