logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.05.18 2014가합4992
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 14,376,454 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Plaintiff’s counterclaim on August 26, 2014.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

In fact, the plaintiff in the contract for steel framed construction is a company with the purpose of V, width, and brining, etc., and the defendant is a company with the purpose of steel structure construction business, steel products construction business, steel structure manufacturing and installation business, steel structure manufacturing and installation business, etc.

On July 22, 2011, the Plaintiff concluded a contract for each of the construction works (including value-added tax) with respect to the extension of the first factory operation of the Plaintiff’s factory in the 993 North Korea-dong, Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-do, and the construction works newly constructed the fourth unit (hereinafter “instant construction works”) with respect to the construction works (hereinafter “instant construction works”), with the construction period of KRW 2,178,00,000 (including value-added tax) from July 25, 2011 to December 20, 201, and the construction period of the construction period of KRW 2,178,000 (including value-added tax) was extended until June 30, 2013.

S Co., on July 26, 2011, concluded each subcontract agreement with the Defendant and the Construction Work (hereinafter “the instant steel framed”), setting the construction period from July 26, 201 to October 20, 201, with the construction cost of KRW 78,800,000 (including value-added tax).

After that, the construction was suspended due to the payment of the construction cost, and the steel framed was resumed on August 30, 2013, and the Plaintiff had to bear KRW 23,000,000 for the re-refluence of steel framed materials kept in custody, and the construction period was extended until February 28, 2014.

The Plaintiff paid the Defendant KRW 233,640,000 in advance, and the intermediate payment KRW 364,650,000 on January 28, 2014, respectively, according to the direct payment agreement for the subcontract price.

On February 10, 2014, the occurrence of accidents and the dispute between the parties, around 22:15, 2014, the PEB method of the same PEB method (Pre-Elebed Bailing method) as the method performed by the defendant in the steel frame, such as the death of an employee who was employed to collapsed the roof at the Geum Young Es Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “gold Es”) company (hereinafter referred to as “gold Es”), is a construction method that sets the steel structure composed of columns and beams into the sandd position panel, and serves the outer walls as the inner columns.

arrow