(영문) 대구지방법원경주지원 2016.06.03 2015가단1409

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원경주지원 2016.06.03 2015가단1409

구상금

Text

1. The claim of this case is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 16, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for a responsible construction of the field director’s office (hereinafter “instant contract for responsible construction”) with respect to the extension of the Multi-Purpose D High School (hereinafter “instant construction”) located in B and nine parcels of land located outside Chungcheongnam-gun, Ulsan-gun, and the construction cost was KRW 1 billion.

B. The Plaintiff completed the instant construction work around February 2015.

[Judgment of the court below] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence No. 2, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was the head of the competent field office, and the Plaintiff opened a passbook in the name of the Defendant for the handling of all expenses related to the instant construction project (Seoul 351-0712-0806-63). Although the Defendant did not deposit various materials, expendable items, personnel expenses, etc. in the said passbook, the Plaintiff did not have to pay the individual expenses first to the head of the said passbook, and the Plaintiff did not have to pay various expenses.

Personal expenses paid by the Plaintiff to the said passbook from August 13, 2014 to January 26, 2015, shall be KRW 54,090,000, and the said money shall be claimed against the Defendant.

3. On the basis of the judgment, it is not sufficient to recognize that the funds deposited in the above account by the plaintiff alone were used for the construction of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this (In addition, the defendant alleged that he paid KRW 1,043,901,52 to the plaintiff with the construction cost under the responsible execution contract of this case, but the plaintiff did not give any particular answer thereto). The plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

4. In conclusion, the claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원경주지원 2016.06.03 2015가단1416

-대구지방법원 2016.12.01 2016나305653

-전주지방법원정읍지원 2014.09.18 2013가단11254

-수원지방법원평택지원 2019.08.29 2017가단55723

-대구지방법원 2015.02.13 2013가단52889