logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.08.13 2013가단118049
공사대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant owned the building on the land outside Seoul Jung-gu and two lots owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant building”). However, the Defendant planned construction on the basis of need for remodeling due to aging.

B. On December 7, 2012, D drafted the first contract for a remodeling project (hereinafter “instant project”). The contract amount was KRW 154,000,000 (excluding value-added tax); the construction period was from December 1, 2012 to January 31, 2013; the payment of construction cost was 4% of the construction cost as contract deposit; the performance bond was issued at the time of completion of the removal project; KRW 38,50,000,000, which is 25% of the construction cost as the first intermediate payment; KRW 61,600,000,000, which is 40% of the construction cost as the second intermediate payment at the time of completion of the construction project; and KRW 307,400,000,000,000 of the construction cost as the second intermediate payment at the time of completion of the construction project; and the remainder was paid as KRW 301,704,07,000 of the construction cost as the remainder.

(2) The preparation D of the secondary contract changed the contractor G to G; the completion date of the construction; the construction cost to D; and the remainder of the construction cost to H’s new bank account (I); however, the Corporation, a corporation, the head office of G, changed to the payment of the construction cost to H; however, it additionally stated that all the legal liabilities arising at the time of the construction are in Co., Ltd., E, the corporation, at the same time, responsible, managed and constructed; and at the same time, there are all the legal liabilities arising therefrom.

(3) After preparing the second contract for the preparation of the third contract, D completed the removal work, but D was unable to obtain the performance guarantee insurance policy in G, which changed the construction cost to D again on December 20, 2012, and the remainder of the construction cost is paid to D to the Plaintiff’s manager, and the J’s account (K).

C. The Defendant’s payment of construction costs and issuance of tax invoices (1) the Defendant deposited KRW 6,160,000 into the Agricultural Cooperative Account of D on December 7, 2012, which is the date of preparation of the first contract.

arrow