logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 2018.09.19 2018나22762
지체상금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the part of the first instance judgment, except for the determination of a new argument made by the defendant in this court as to the new argument as set forth in the following paragraph (2). Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Additional determination

A. As to the violation of the good faith principle, the defendant asserts that the agreement on liquidated damages stipulated in the modified contract of this case separately agreed on the rate of liquidated damages for the reason of the defendant's fault, and that the agreement is not effective because it overlaps with the agreement on liquidated damages, as well as unilaterally unfavorable to the defendant, and it is against the good faith principle. However, the agreement on liquidated damages cannot be deemed null and void in light of the good faith principle. Thus, the defendant'

B. The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s claim for compensation for delay arose from July 27, 2013, which was the day following the date of completion of the instant construction agreement, and that the said claim was extinguished by prescription on September 5, 2017, when the instant lawsuit was filed on September 5, 2017, three years after the said lawsuit was filed.

The claim for liquidated damages based on the construction contract cannot be deemed as a claim for the contractor against the contractor, which is subject to the three-year short-term extinctive prescription under Article 163 subparagraph 3 of the Civil Act.

Therefore, the construction contract of this case and the modified contract of this case concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant who performs commercial activities in his own name for his business constitute commercial activities, and the plaintiff's compensation claim for delay is a commercial claim and the extinctive prescription period is five years.

On the other hand, if there is an agreement on compensation for delay in a contract for new construction of a building as in the instant construction project, the extinctive prescription of the claim for compensation for delay shall proceed from the date of completion of the

arrow