logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.01.06 2015나19671
공사대금
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. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 20, 2014, the Plaintiff paid the first construction work and the construction cost. (1) On or around April 20, 2014, the Yangyang-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu (hereinafter “instant Yangyang-gu”).

(2) The construction of the facilities, such as the open air distribution facility, the water window, the drinking water medication equipment, the water control pipe, and the pipe construction (hereinafter referred to as the “the primary construction”).

(2) On May 2, 2014, the Defendant paid 14650,000 won to the Plaintiff all of the first construction cost to the Plaintiff on May 2, 2014.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant, around May 2014, paid the second construction and construction cost (i.e., the second construction and construction cost) and the installation of an open-out facility, etc. outside of the instant double-generation (hereinafter “the second construction”).

(2) The lower part of the specification of transactions related to the primary project issued by the Plaintiff to the Defendant (Evidence B No. 1; hereinafter “instant specification of transactions”) is indicated as “the construction work in a double-lane of KRW 3.5 million.”

3) Meanwhile, around July 2014, the Plaintiff completed the second construction around May 2014, and around July 2014, demanded the Defendant to pay KRW 5,50,000 to the second construction cost (i.e., KRW 3., KRW 3,500,000, KRW 400,000, KRW 500,000, KRW 500,000, KRW 400,000). The Defendant paid KRW 3,00,000 to the Plaintiff on September 5, 2014.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the second construction cost is KRW 5 million in total (i.e., KRW 3.., million in the open-to-date facility (i.e., KRW 4 million in the automatic temperature facility) and KRW 3.5 million in the Defendant’s assertion that the second construction cost is KRW 3.5 million in the open-to-date facility is merely the construction cost for the outside-to-date facility during the second construction.

arrow