logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.16 2014가합42054
공사잔대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff is a company that aims at the development, etc. of the artificial design. The Defendant is a doctor who operated the D Hospital (hereinafter “instant hospital”) on the 5,6,7th floor of the Goyang-dong-gu Seoul Metropolitan City building C from December 2009 to September 201.

B. On August 20, 2009, the Defendant: (a) on August 30, 2009, the construction period for the installation of the facilities of the hospital 5 and the sixth floor in the instant hospital from August 30, 2009 to December 1, 2009; and (b) on December 640,000,000 won for the construction price.

C. On July 20, 2010, the Defendant: (a) set the construction period from July 20, 2010 to September 30, 2010; and (b) set the construction cost at KRW 240,000,000 for the construction cost.

(hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant contracts”) D, in total, the contract for construction works under subsection (b).

The Plaintiff completed all of the hospital facility construction works under each of the instant contracts.

The Defendant paid KRW 90,000,000 among the construction cost under each of the instant contracts to the Plaintiff. Since the Defendant directly implemented the part corresponding to KRW 300,000,000 among the construction cost under each of the instant contracts, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of KRW 500,000 for the construction cost (the Plaintiff asserted that the construction cost that was paid by the Defendant was KRW 80,000,000, but corrected again as KRW 90,000) to the Plaintiff.

2. The defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant contracted the construction of the instant hospital 5 and 6 stories to the Plaintiff on August 20, 2009.

Around November 2009, the Defendant acquired the instant hospital (5,6th floor) that had been completed human rights as well as the obligations for the construction cost.

The obligation to pay the construction cost that the defendant accepted was fully repaid while operating the hospital.

B. The Defendant did not contract the instant hospital 7 floor construction to the Plaintiff on July 20, 2010.

The defendant, around July 7, 2010, leased the 7th floor of the above building to the construction business operator, introduced by the plaintiff, entrusts the construction of the 7th floor interior.

arrow