logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.01 2015나18366
공사대금 및 물품대금
Text

1. The part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

2...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 26, 2011, the Defendant awarded a contract for construction work to Seongbuk-gu Seoul, J, and K-based Urban Residential Housing (hereinafter “G”) by setting the construction cost of KRW 1,270,00,000, and the construction period of KRW 190 within 190 from the date of removal.

B. The Plaintiff’s re-demand (1) G subcontracted the instant construction to several comprehensive construction companies (hereinafter “many comprehensive construction”).

(2) On May 10, 2012, multiple comprehensive construction effected a sub-subcontract to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant re-subcontract”) with the construction cost of 48,000,000 won for boiler and toilet construction among the instant construction works.

C. The Defendant’s failure to perform the instant construction and the Defendant’s remarks (1) were due to the failure to perform the instant construction on July 2012.

The subcontractors, including the Plaintiff, discontinued the instant construction work.

(2) On November 27, 2012, the Defendant, including I, the representative of G, and the Plaintiff, stated to the effect that “the Defendant would take responsibility and construction cost,” in the presence of the subcontractors including the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant remarks”) D.

Upon completion of the instant construction project, one house constructed as the instant construction was completed on February 22, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 11, 17 through 20, Eul evidence 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff would pay the Plaintiff’s construction cost according to the re-subcontract of this case by making the instant statement.

The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid construction cost of KRW 34,950,000 and damages for delay.

B. (1) According to the overall purport of the entry and pleading of Gap evidence Nos. 11, Eul evidence Nos. 11, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 4, 3 through 12, and 14-1, 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 15, the defendant shall file a complaint with the plaintiff, etc.

arrow