beta
Text
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid next shall be revoked.
(2).
Reasons
1. Facts constituting the premise of the dispute
A. A. On September 24, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the construction of a new building on the ground of the land of the Cheongju-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the amount of KRW 300 million, and paid the Defendant KRW 150 million in advance.
B. On April 2, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the instant contract was cancelled on the grounds of the Defendant’s unilateral discontinuance of construction, and had a third party complete the said new construction work.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 2 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. Since the contract of this case was cancelled when the defendant did not complete the construction work, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the remainder of KRW 62,010,000 after deducting the construction cost of the defendant's work cost of 87,990,000 for the payment of KRW 15,000 paid to the plaintiff from the advance payment of KRW 150,000 paid by the plaintiff.
B. (1) The so-called advance payment received under a contract for construction work provides the contractor with the payment in advance for the construction work to ensure the smooth progress of the construction work without difficulty in securing materials and paying wages. In light of the above, if the contractor has to return the advance payment due to the reasons such as the cancellation or termination of the contract after the advance payment was made, barring any special circumstances, the unpaid amount of the construction work that is equivalent to the advance payment up to the time of the cancellation or termination shall be appropriated as advance payment and the contractor is liable to pay the remainder of the construction work, but Supreme Court Decision 7 December 199 delivered on December 7, 199.