(영문) 대전고등법원 2020.05.20 2020나10754

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전고등법원 2020.05.20 2020나10754

공사대금

Text

1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

Of the instant lawsuit, KRW 179,301,00 among the instant lawsuit and its related thereto shall be January 10, 2020.

Reasons

The court's explanation of this case is identical to the remaining part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for dismissal or addition of a part of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, the court's explanation of this case is acceptable as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Among the grounds of the judgment of the first instance, the contents of the fourth-class 10 to 13 are as follows.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the total construction cost of KRW 730,00 (=244,200,000 additional construction cost of KRW 240,000 (=242,00,000 additional construction cost of KRW 240,200)) plus KRW 34,300,000 already paid to the plaintiff and KRW 364,715,000 remaining after subtracting the amount of direct payments of KRW 56,30,000 for H from KRW 309,00 and KRW 56,30,000 for direct payments of KRW 56,30,00,00 for the first instance judgment and delay damages therefor).

Of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, “each of the above construction contracts shall be deemed to be a completely effective contract” in the first sentence of the first instance judgment, “The above construction contract shall be deemed to be a contract with the plaintiff and the defendant to conclude the construction contract, and even though there is any error in the indication of the representative, G may be deemed to have lawfully signed the construction contract on behalf of M which was the defendant’s representative director at the time of the defendant’s representative director at the time of the first instance judgment.”

Of the grounds of the judgment of the first instance, the details of the 6th to 19th of the 6th of the judgment are as follows.

“2) The Defendant alleged that “L paid a total of KRW 344,144,878 for 1 through 3 works,” and that “a modified contract was prepared by settling accounts for 2 and 3 works,” but it appears that P, a de facto representative of L, refers to the Defendant Q Q site (2 and 3 works site).

A total of KRW 201,284,292 is supplied to the material.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2020.08.21 2018나2071350

-인천지방법원 2020.12.03 2019나66395

-서울고등법원 2020.07.15 2020누30056

-서울고등법원 2019.04.10 2018나2067078

-춘천지방법원 2018.04.24 2017나50574