logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.01.27 2013나20719
공사대금 등
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. The summary of the case and the facts premised on the case

A. The summary of the case is the case claiming payment of KRW 228,50,000 for the remainder of the construction work and its delay damages against the defendant, alleging that the plaintiff completed the construction of the cream and panel construction subcontracted from the defendant and delivered the subject matter to the defendant.

The first instance court accepted some of the plaintiff's claims (136,134,446 won and damages for delay) and filed an appeal against the part against both the plaintiff and the defendant.

B. Presumption 1) The Plaintiff is a company with the purpose of wholesale and retail business of construction materials, construction business, etc., and the Defendant is a company with the purpose of construction business. 2) On December 8, 2010, the Defendant was awarded a subcontract for construction works among the construction works for housing site development projects at B-2 phase from the Dongyang Construction Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Dongyang Construction”) on December 8, 2010.

3) On June 3, 2011, the Plaintiff’s construction work with the Defendant, among the above construction work, shall be conducted by the cream and panel construction work (hereinafter “instant construction work”).

(2) The construction agreement to re-subcontract the construction cost of KRW 506,00,000 (including value-added tax) (hereinafter “instant primary contract”).

In concluding the contract, the Defendant agreed as follows (the Defendant: (a) led to the confession of the conclusion of the instant primary contract in the first instance court; and (b) subsequently, the Defendant asserted that such confession was contrary to the truth and was caused by mistake and thus revoked.

However, according to the evidence evidence Nos. 3, 4, 11, and 17, the Plaintiff issued to the Defendant a tax invoice on July 1, 2011, August 31, 2011, and November 30, 2011: (a) 187,000,000 won = 110,000,000 won = 110,000,000 won in total; and (b) the Defendant issued each of the above tax invoices from the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff’s bank account; and (c) the Plaintiff filed a claim for construction payment on September 15, 201, 200 = 367,00,000 won in total with the Plaintiff’s account on July 170, 200, 2000, and KRW 367,000 in total with the Plaintiff’s account on September 10, 2015;

arrow