logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.10.04 2018가합122
공사비 등
Text

1. Defendant B Co., Ltd. is attached Form 2.0 to the remaining designated parties except for Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and Appointed D.

Reasons

1. Basic facts (applicable for recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 11 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply);

A) Each entry and the purport of the entire argument of the defendant B-A-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that Defendant B should pay each of the money indicated in the attached Table 2 “the claim amount” to the Plaintiff and the designated parties, such as the user fee of equipment related to the instant construction work.

The above facts are acknowledged as follows. The charges, such as the fees for the use of equipment, etc. supplied by Defendant B, except for Plaintiff and Selection D, are as follows.

However, the Appointor D supplied Defendant B with equipment equivalent to KRW 5,500,000.

There is no evidence to acknowledge that G has provided services equivalent to KRW 5,915,280 in excess of KRW 5,914,280.

Therefore, Defendant B, except the Plaintiff and the Appointor D, seek damages for delay as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the day following the delivery of the complaint of this case to each of the above amounts as stated in the attached Table 2 “personal fee” and each of the above amounts by equipment use fees, etc. shall be dismissed.

From March 22, 2018 to the date of full payment, 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings is liable to pay damages for delay calculated.

B. The Plaintiff filed a claim against the remaining Defendants, Defendant C, which is merely a compliance with the non-realistic entities, is Defendant B.

arrow