beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 66,836,960 with respect to the Plaintiff, and 5% per annum from April 24, 2015 to June 16, 2016.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On March 28, 2012, the Plaintiff, a company engaged in civil engineering and construction business, etc., concluded a construction contract that newly constructs neighborhood living facilities, detached houses, and warehouses at KRW 836,00,000 in construction cost on the ground of 6,810 square meters of E-si, E-si between C and D and D, and performed the said construction.
B. On August 9, 2013, C and D filed a principal lawsuit against the Plaintiff on the claim for damages under the Suwon District Court 2013Kahap17608 relating to the said construction project and sought payment of the unpaid construction and repair cost, etc. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a counterclaim against the claim for construction cost under the above court 2013Gahap24941 and filed a claim for payment of the remainder of construction and additional construction cost, etc.
C. The Defendants, an attorney-at-law, appointed the Plaintiff as the Plaintiff’s attorney in the foregoing case, and conducted the lawsuit, and the said court rendered a judgment on April 2, 2015 (hereinafter “previous first instance judgment”) as follows. -
C and D’s principal claim, - The judgment citing C and D’s claim for the payment of the unpaid construction and repair costs of KRW 194,978,472 and KRW 97,489,236, and KRW 66,836,960 and KRW 33,418,480, and KRW 130,907,716 (= KRW 97,489,236, 33,418,480) and damages for delay - The judgment citing the Plaintiff’s claim for the counterclaim - C and D’s payment of the unpaid construction costs of KRW 91,60,60,00 and the excessive construction costs of KRW 93,678,577, and damages for delay citing the payment of the unpaid construction costs of KRW 184,68,577, and damages for delay.
D. After the previous judgment of the court of first instance was rendered, the Defendants made an erroneous explanation to the Plaintiff on the outcome of the previous judgment of the court of first instance to the effect that the Plaintiff would merely pay KRW 261,815,432, a sum of KRW 130,907,716, respectively, to C and D by the principal suit, notwithstanding the purport that the Plaintiff would pay KRW 261,815,432.
E. Ultimately, in full view of the principal lawsuit and counterclaim in the previous judgment of the first instance court, the Plaintiff KRW 76,846,855 =261,815.