logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.04.22 2015나43209
용역비
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, 5, and 6 and Eul evidence Nos. 2 and Eul evidence Nos. 2, the plaintiff supplied human resources B, C, etc. to the construction site in charge of the defendant from January 19, 2014 to January 10, 2014, and on August 13, 2014, the defendant issued a tax invoice for KRW 946,00 (including value-added tax) in return for the above human resources supply; and on the settlement statement prepared by the defendant (Evidence No. 2) from January 31, 2014 to May 31, 2014, it can be recognized that the payment was made in full for the human resources supplied by the plaintiff with respect to "D site" while it is stated that the payment was not paid for the "A field portion".

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 946,00 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from December 9, 2014 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of the instant complaint.

B. On January 201, 2014, the Defendant alleged that the Plaintiff did not have received human resources supply from the Plaintiff, and therefore, the Plaintiff is not obligated to pay the price for human resources supply. However, the following circumstances revealed by the fact of recognition: (a) although the Defendant did not receive human resources supply from the Plaintiff regarding “A”, it stated the fact of human resources supply as alleged by the Plaintiff in the settlement statement prepared by the Plaintiff; and (b) instead stated the fact of false claim or unjust claim in relation to the payment of the price; (c) the output confirmation sheet (Evidence 3) prepared by the Plaintiff in relation to the supply of human resources at the A site; (d) the number of the labor personnel and the labor force value written by the Plaintiff in relation to the supply of human resources to the Defendant; and (e) B and C provided labor at the Defendant’s site on January 10, 2014.

arrow