logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.05.19 2013가합11094 (1)
부당이득금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in civil engineering and construction business, and the Defendant is a company that aims at housing construction business, repair business business, civil engineering and construction business, etc.

The non-party-party-based social welfare foundation B (hereinafter referred to as the "B") entered into a contract with the non-party-party-based corporation for the comprehensive construction of DD facilities located in the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the said company completed the construction by 26.2% and suspended the construction. After December 27, 201, the contract was concluded between the Defendant and the remaining parts of the said construction (hereinafter referred to as "the remainder of the instant construction") during the contract period from December 26, 2011 to August 25, 2012 (including value-added tax) with regard to the construction of the instant construction (hereinafter referred to as "the instant construction contract") with the total contract amount of KRW 2,047,603,119 (including value-added tax), and thereafter the construction period was changed to the period until December 8, 2012, and the contract amount was increased to KRW 100,000,000,000.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant actually performed the instant construction project. The Defendant received 3% of the construction amount under the pretext of the commission, and the Plaintiff concluded an agreement with the Plaintiff to bear all expenses, taxes, etc. as the remainder of the construction amount and to vest the profits and losses therefrom in the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

Then, the Plaintiff, while actually performing the instant construction project, paid the construction price according to the advance payment and the rate of the construction price in the instant case to the Defendant as indicated in the claim form in the attached Form No. 1, and deposited it into the Defendant’s account (hereinafter “instant account”) under the name of the Defendant, the Plaintiff carried out construction by using the passbook and the corporate bond ledger, etc. of the said account that the Plaintiff had been holding a dives from the Defendant.

The Plaintiff performed the instant construction before the end of December, 2012, and suspended the construction, including gas and marketing construction at the time.

arrow