logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.08.14 2012가합23529
공사비반환
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 89,324,97 and its annual rate from January 1, 2013 to August 14, 2014, and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5%.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. 1) The Defendant and the Plaintiff’s contract entered into between the Defendant and the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Libered Construction”)

) The Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Urban Residential Housing (hereinafter referred to as the “instant building”) is an urban residential housing of 321 square meters on the ground.

(2) The Defendant and the Plaintiff concluded a contract for the follow-up construction of the instant building (hereinafter “instant contract”) on September 20, 2012, with the construction amount of KRW 1,464,210,000, while the construction was in progress on September 5, 2012. The Defendant and the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the follow-up construction of the instant building (hereinafter “instant contract”), with the terms and conditions of the special agreement, all of the tasks incurred prior to the instant contract are liable and resolved by the Defendant, and the costs of civil petition treatment are KRW 25,00,000,000, out of KRW 40,000,000, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 150,000,000,000, out of the construction price until September 26, 2012.

B. (1) The Defendant did not pay KRW 150,00,00 to the Plaintiff until September 26, 2012. On September 27, 2012, the Defendant agreed to resume the construction work on October 31, 2012, the Defendant and the Plaintiff agreed to immediately suspend the construction work and demand the Defendant to pay wages to be incurred at the construction site of the instant building and interfere with the construction work. (2) The Defendant and the Plaintiff agreed to resume the construction work on September 31, 2012, and immediately pay civil petition treatment costs, if the construction is no longer possible due to the obstruction of construction, etc.

3. On October 31, 2012, the Defendant paid KRW 25,000,000 to the Plaintiff out of the costs of treating civil petitions. The Plaintiff bears KRW 15,000,000 to the neighboring residents, with the burden of KRW 15,00,000 as the costs of treating civil petitions.

arrow