beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The party's assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff completed the construction work by entering into a subcontract for the ethyl joint construction work, which was contracted by the Defendant for a new construction work of Taesung C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”), but was not paid the subcontract price due to the management difficulties of the Nonparty Company.
Therefore, since the plaintiff, non-party company, and the defendant agreed to receive the subcontract price directly from the defendant, the defendant is obligated to pay the unpaid subcontract price of KRW 14,353,90 and damages for delay.
B. The Defendant’s assertion that the subcontractor other than the Plaintiff agreed to pay the subcontract price directly, and received a provisional attachment and attachment order from creditors of the non-party company regarding the claim for construction price against the Defendant of the non-party company.
As a result, the defendant was unable to know the creditor without fault and deposited the remaining construction cost of KRW 75,052,135, so the obligation to pay the subcontract price to the plaintiff was extinguished.
C. Considering the overall purport of each statement and pleading of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) in the judgment, the plaintiff completed construction by entering into a subcontract for ethyl pressing construction from the defendant with respect to the new construction of A, and the non-party company was unable to pay the subcontract price to the plaintiff on December 9, 2014. The defendant agreed to pay the subcontract price directly to the plaintiff on December 9, 2014. The plaintiff issued a tax invoice of KRW 97,000,000 in total three times from October 31, 2014 to December 19 of the same year, and received it from the defendant. The plaintiff can be acknowledged that the non-party company was not paid the above money by the defendant, even though it issued the tax invoice of KRW 14,353,00 on March 17, 2015.
However, the evidence presented above is described in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the pleading is made.