logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원밀양지원 2017.06.20 2017가단300
공사대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Plaintiff’s assertion

On February 2, 2015, the Plaintiff contracted with the Defendant for C construction work, and completed the construction work on May 5, 2015.

At the time of the above construction contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to supply materials for construction, and the Plaintiff demanded only the labor cost to the Defendant by inserting materials for construction work, but thereafter, the Plaintiff purchased materials for construction work by itself due to the Defendant’s failure to supply materials during the construction process.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff claims for the payment of the total of 37,062,122 won and damages for delay incurred at the time of the construction.

Judgment

As alleged by the Plaintiff, it is difficult to believe that the Defendant would pay the Plaintiff the labor cost and material cost actually invested in the above construction project as it is, even though it is considered on the premise that the Plaintiff would have paid the Plaintiff the labor cost and material cost, it is difficult to conclude that the Plaintiff’s evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 6 (including various numbers) related to the details of labor cost and material cost invested. Moreover, it is difficult to readily conclude that each of the evidence Nos. 2, 3, 5, and 7, which

In addition, according to the evidence evidence Nos. 1 through 5, it appears that there are many particulars of the Defendant’s direct payment of personnel expenses and material expenses, and in addition to the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant had already paid the amount of construction expenses equivalent to that of the Plaintiff, it is difficult to recognize that the Defendant has already paid the amount of construction expenses to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow