beta
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 September 21, 2015, the Defendant: (a) was divided from Nonparty C into KRW 4183 square meters (185 square meters prior to the date of the subdivision owned by the Defendant on January 20, 2016; (b) KRW 485 square meters prior to the date of the subdivision owned by the Defendant; (c) KRW 480 square meters prior to the date of the subdivision; (d) KRW 573 square meters prior to the date of the subdivision; (e) KRW 528 square meters prior to G; and (e) KRW 185 square meters prior to the date of the subdivision; (e) was divided into KRW 101 square meters prior to the date of the subdivision and KRW 844 square meters prior to the date of the subdivision; and (e) was transferred to the account in the name of KRW 3,000 in the name of the wife around February 25, 2017.
B. From October 13, 2015 to December 2, 2015, the Defendant proposed that the sum of KRW 3,500,000,000 that the Defendant already paid from C would be completed by December 31, 2015 to create the instant land as a housing site, and entered into a contract for the civil works to create the instant land as a housing site with C on October 22, 2015, and transferred KRW 70,000 to the account in the name of the largest master shareholder on the same day.
C. Around August 2017, the Plaintiff received sewage from C to perform the reinforcement work between September 20, 2017 and October 1, 2017 (hereinafter “instant reinforcement work”); and C subcontracted the instant reinforcement work to the Plaintiff, and C did not issue a payment guarantee letter of subcontract consideration.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 6, 7 (including each number, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. Article 35(2)5 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry provides a subcontractor with a payment guarantee letter of subcontract consideration under Article 34(2) without good cause, where the contractor fails to verify the fact or the subcontractor directly pays the subcontract consideration to the project owner.