beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly and severally committed against the Plaintiff KRW 43,850,000 and the Defendant C Co., Ltd from November 1, 2018.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On June 12, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) by setting the construction cost as KRW 134,750,000 with respect to the On-Road Construction among the Fresh Construction Works in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Fresh Housing as the construction cost, and completed the construction.
B. The Plaintiff was not paid KRW 73,500,000 from the non-party company. On December 4, 2017, the Plaintiff received a written consent from the non-party company to pay the subcontract price directly to the Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”). On December 22, 2017, the Plaintiff received KRW 20,000,000 from the Defendant company.
C. On July 10, 2018, Defendant Company paid 58,850,000 won to the Plaintiff up to October 31, 2018, and Defendant D prepared and delivered a letter of performance with respect to joint and several sureties’s performance, and thereafter paid KRW 15,00,000 to the Plaintiff.
[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Judgment on the parties' arguments
A. The summary of the assertion 1) The Plaintiff is jointly and severally liable to pay the goods in accordance with the instant performance sheet. Even if the Defendant Company’s employees did not have the authority to act on behalf of the Defendant Company, the Plaintiff did not have any authority to act on behalf of the Defendant Company, but trusted the Defendant Company’s representative director and entrusted it to the Defendant Company’s employees, and did not know or could not know that it was forged or certified at will. (2) Defendant D has not granted the power to act on the preparation of the performance sheet of this case. The instant performance sheet was prepared by the Defendant Company’s unauthorized Representation or unauthorized Agency by using the Defendant Company’s seal impression design and identification card, and thus, the instant performance sheet of this case is null and void by an unauthorized Representation, and no apparent representation liability is established under Article 126 of the Civil Act or Article 129 of the Civil Act.
B. Therefore, the existence of one power of representation can be determined, and the defendant.