logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.06.02 2016가단520831
부당이득금
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 86,776,440 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its amount from September 6, 2016 to June 2, 2017.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 18, 2013, the Defendant concluded that the instant construction work will be executed in the name of the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “instant subcontract agreement”) between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff by setting the respective period from December 16, 2013 to October 11, 2014, on a lump sum subcontract between the Plaintiff and the period of construction of KRW 300,000,000 (excluding value-added tax) and the period of construction from December 16, 2013 to October 11, 2014, on the condition that the Defendant, in order to conceal the fact that the instant construction work was collectively subcontracted to the Plaintiff by the Defendant, the Plaintiff agreed to perform the instant construction work in the name of the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “instant subcontract agreement”).

(No. 1). (b)

On December 11, 2013, the Defendant concluded each contract for the instant construction work with the Sung-gun, Sung-do, Seoul Special Metropolitan City during a fixed period from December 16, 2013 to October 11, 2014 (No. 7-1), and concluded each contract on November 30, 2015, between the construction cost of the instant construction work and the Sung-do Special Metropolitan City (No. 638,50,000,000 and the date of completion).

(7) No. 7) c.

The plaintiff is the defendant around December 18, 2013 and the above A.

Only written agreement (No. 1) as stated in paragraph (1) was prepared, and the construction of this case was commenced in the name of the defendant pursuant to the instant blanket subcontract agreement without agreement on the specific subcontract consideration or settlement method following the amendment to the terms of the contract, and the construction of this case was completed at the time of completion.

The Plaintiff, while executing the instant construction, entered into a subcontract, equipment rent contract, labor contract, etc. in the name of the Defendant at the request of the Defendant, and the Defendant and the Jeonnam-do, by means of direct payment of the price. The construction cost that the Defendant and Jeonnam-do directly paid to the subcontractor, etc. in relation to the instant construction from July 3, 2014 to January 22, 2016 is the aggregate of 471,134.

arrow