logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.08.22 2013가합64248
손해배상(기) 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Circumstances leading to the dispute of this case;

A. The Defendant was awarded a contract from the Incheon Metropolitan City Waterworks Business Headquarters for construction work as a water pipe between Incheon and the Seocho-si District.

[Contract]

1. The project owner: The name of the original contract for the waterworks project headquarters of Incheon Metropolitan City: Construction works annexed to the water pipe between Incheon-Seo-Seo-Sung River;

2. The name of subcontracted construction work: Water supply and sewerage;

3. Construction site: A project for the promotion of a section of 600-4 Mam2, Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu.

4. Construction period: The contract amount on October 5, 201 from the date of commencement on December 20, 201, on which December 20, 2010: 2,123,00,000 won [general terms and conditions of the subcontract of construction works] Article 3 (Construction, etc.] (1) The Plaintiff shall perform the construction works in accordance with the terms and conditions of this contract and design documents (including construction specifications, design drawings and site descriptions).

B. On December 19, 2010, the Defendant subcontracted the instant construction work to the Plaintiff for a section promotion project between the mar chain and the mar intersection (hereinafter “instant construction”) among the foregoing construction works.

(hereinafter “instant subcontract”). The main contents of the instant subcontract are as follows.

C. Around December 20, 2010, the Plaintiff started the instant construction work and carried out the instant construction work in a depth of about 15 meters underground, by using a propellor and propellor (hereinafter “instant machinery”) and a propellor used by the Plaintiff in the construction work in a horizontal direction. D.

On August 11, 2011, the Plaintiff discovered improvement rain (for example, 17cm, 7cm in length, and 50cm factory expenses made of steel with a thickness of 4cm) from the underground section of the construction, and then on August 28, 2011, there was approximately 50cm heat from the two propellors of the instant machinery among the instant machinery on August 28, 201 (if the instant machinery conflicts with the improvement rain, it appears that it was caused by its shock), and on September 1, 2011, oil was leaked from the propelling machine.

In addition, around September 5, 201, the machinery of this case is installed below the New Airport Highway (in the name of 406.9m, 9m in thickness) 3 pages.

arrow