(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.08.19 2015나5420 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.08.19 2015나5420

공사대금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the cases where the judgment of the court of first instance is affixed as follows. Thus, this is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary Part] Part 3 5 of Part 3 is "," and next to "the construction cost of this case is approximately KRW 40,000,000," added.

Part 4, conduct 21 to 5, conduct 11 are as follows:

3. The construction cost of this case can be recognized only as KRW 40,000,000 recognized by the Defendant, depending on whether the construction cost of this case was fully paid in full, and the fact that the Defendant paid KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff on December 29, 2011 is as seen above.

In regard to this, the defendant asserted that the defendant paid 15,300,000 won to the plaintiff on December 16, 2011, the defendant paid 15,300,000 won to the plaintiff, but the above 15,300,00 won was paid as the price for the construction of the elevator that was not included in the construction of this case, so the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

Next, the defendant asserts that the defendant paid 10,000,000 won at par value to the plaintiff as the construction cost of this case, thereby repaying the entire construction cost of this case.

According to the statement in Eul evidence 6-15 through 20, the national bank of this court, and the response result of each order to submit financial transaction information to Han Bank, and the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiff deposited cashier's checks of KRW H, KRW 10,000,00 in the Plaintiff's account on May 19, 201, which are issued by the national bank, in the Defendant's monetary receipt and disbursement book, stated "1,0000,000 which is issued by the check citizen", in the Defendant's monetary receipt and disbursement book, it is recognized that the building permit for the above multi-family house was made on June 1, 201, but it is found that the above evidence and the entire arguments were accepted as follows, namely, the plaintiff and the Defendant.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-부산고등법원 2014.12.23 2013나9789

-창원지방법원 2014.12.09 2014가단5800

-대전지방법원홍성지원 2015.04.28 2014가단11116

-광주고등법원 (전주) 2018.06.28 2017나10409

-부산지방법원 2020.11.27 2019나63508