logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.09.27 2016가단212620
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Mental construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “mental construction”) entered into a contract with the Plaintiff on January 17, 2012 regarding the instant construction of reinforced concrete (hereinafter “instant construction”) among the construction of Han Light Construction Co., Ltd. and Yongsan Integrated Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul Special Metropolitan City’s construction”) that was ordered by Daejeon Special Metropolitan City as to the construction of reinforced concrete (the “instant construction”) at KRW 2,398,00,000 among the Plaintiff.

B. On April 22, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a material supply contract with the non-party company in order to be supplied with materials (ston leasing) to be used in the instant construction by Korea-N.C. (hereinafter “non-party company”).

C. During the process of the instant construction project under the said subcontract, the Plaintiff agreed on July 14, 2014 to waive and settle the instant construction project.

The non-party company seized the Plaintiff’s claim for construction price against a third party in order to receive the price of materials supplied, and collected KRW 24,868,356 on March 25, 2016 and KRW 24,868,356 on December 24, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Partial non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Gap's evidence Nos. 5 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. At the time of the Plaintiff’s agreement on Section 1 of this case’s construction, mental construction is responsible for unpaid materials, equipment costs, and labor costs, and the Plaintiff agreed to issue a promissory note in the amount of KRW 100,000 to mental construction.

Accordingly, mental construction promised to pay the material price of the non-party company to the non-party company.

However, because mental construction did not pay the material cost of the non-party company, the non-party company collected the plaintiff's claim.

Ultimately, since the Plaintiff repaid the obligation of mental construction on behalf of the Plaintiff, the Defendant merged with the mental construction on May 30, 2016 in the instant lawsuit, and the instant lawsuit against mental construction is instituted.

arrow