beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff and the Defendants: 459,343,250 won deposited in gold No. 593 at this Court on June 14, 2018.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “stock company”) is a subcontractor awarded a contract for “the extension of library for the use of (Gu) PP Middle School Sports Center (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction”) ordered by Gyeongnam-do (Office of Education).”
B. On December 26, 2017, B awarded a contract to the Plaintiff for the “tin construction work” in the instant construction work to KRW 53,900,000 (including value-added tax) and agreed to directly pay the Gyeongnam-do and the Plaintiff and the said construction work amount (subcontract) pursuant to Article 35 of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry, Article 29 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, Article 14 of the Subcontract Fair Transactions Act (hereinafter “subcontract”), and Article 9 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.
According to this, the ordering person directly pays the construction cost to the subcontractor, and the obligation to pay the price to the contractor to the contractor is extinguished within the scope of the subcontract law. This is also applicable to the case where the provisions, such as the Subcontract Act, are not applied.
Defendant C, E, and D also received part of the instant construction from B, and entered into a direct payment agreement with the same contents as Gyeong-do, Gyeong-do, and B. The separate payment agreement was made on December 26, 2017, Defendant D Steel Corporation’s KRW 95,000,000 on December 28, 2017, and the specific date and amount, etc. are as follows:
C. On March 23, 2018, Defendant G received the instant decision on provisional seizure of claim against the instant claim for construction cost against the Gyeongnam-do (Seoul District Court Decision 2018Kadan100576), which was served on the Gyeong-do, the third debtor on March 28, 2018, and became final and conclusive.
In addition, Defendant H, J, K, L, M, N, andO also seized or provisionally seized the claim for the construction cost of this case.