logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.04.08 2015나31935
공사대금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 2013, the Defendant: (a) contracted the construction of interior interior interior interior interior interior interior decoration among the construction of the department store; (b) subcontracted to the Plaintiff the metal construction among the construction of the said interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior decoration (hereinafter “instant construction”). On February 12, 2013, the Defendant subcontracted to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant subcontract”). (b)

The Plaintiff presented KRW 133,460,349 to the Defendant as the estimated amount of the instant construction project. Upon consultation with the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff set the construction cost at KRW 115,00,000 (value-added tax) as a result of the Defendant’s consultation. While the instant construction project was being carried out, the volume of the original construction in the construction site was reduced and the additional construction was incurred, the Plaintiff would determine the construction cost after consultation after construction, and the additional construction was completed on June 2013, and the Defendant paid KRW 115,00,000 to the Plaintiff as part of the construction cost.

C. After completion of the instant construction project, the Plaintiff submitted a written estimate (Evidence No. 1) to the Defendant that the total construction cost including the additional construction cost is KRW 244,091,503 (excluding value-added tax). However, the Defendant did not recognize the construction volume and unit price of the said written estimate, and the appraiser A A (hereinafter “ appraiser”) of the first instance trial assessed that the construction cost originally planned was reduced to KRW 65,225,147, and the additional construction cost was reduced to KRW 119,083,676, resulting in KRW 184,308,823 as the construction cost of the instant construction project.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including branch numbers in case of additional number), testimony of witness B of the first instance trial, the result of the appraisal of appraiser A of the first instance trial, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant shall pay the plaintiff KRW 184,308,823 with the construction cost and the additional construction cost pursuant to the subcontract of this case. Among them, the plaintiff was paid KRW 115,00,000, and thus, the defendant is the plaintiff.

arrow