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. A. Around July 2001, the Plaintiff was awarded a contract with the Defendant for the construction cost of KRW 400,000,000 for the construction cost of the 6th floor of the Osan-si Building B (hereinafter “instant construction”).
B. Around October 1, 201, the Plaintiff, while performing the instant construction work, suspended the instant construction work, and was removed from the instant construction work at that time. Until that time, the Plaintiff received KRW 200,000,000 out of the construction cost of the instant case from the Defendant.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 4, 9, 10, 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff asserts that the construction work of this case, including value-added tax, was suspended until October 1, 201, had been carried out as of KRW 250,800,000,000, and that the Defendant is obligated to pay the unpaid construction cost ( KRW 250,800,000 - KRW 200,000,000), as well as the delay damages.
B. Determination is based on the construction cost agreed upon between the parties to a contract for construction works where the contract for construction works has been terminated even if the contract for construction works has already been terminated, the remuneration for the buildings which the contractor is obliged to pay is not based on the actual cost paid by the contractor, not on the basis of the contractor’s actual cost of construction at the time of the discontinuance of the construction works, and on the basis of the contractor’s actual cost of construction at the time of the discontinuance of the construction works, and on the basis of determining the details of the agreed construction work and the details of the part already completed and the contents of the construction yet completed, the construction cost for the already completed part at the time of the occurrence of the obligation to pay the construction cost and the construction cost to be incurred in completing
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 91Da42630, Mar. 31, 1992; 94Da31631, Jan. 23, 1996). In light of such legal principles, the instant case is health care unit.