beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. 23,404,970 Won Masan Co., Ltd.;
B. Defendant State Construction Industry Co., Ltd. is the Defendant.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On December 31, 2008, the Defendants were awarded a contract from Seocho-gu for a new medical care center specializing in the aged at Seocho-gu (hereinafter “instant medical care center”).
B. The investment ratio of the above joint supply and demand company is 43% of the defendant Swelsan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Swelsan”), 37% of the defendant Oran Construction Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Oran Construction”), 20% of the defendant Il Il Construction Limited Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Il Il Construction”), and the defendant Mwelsan is the representative of the above joint supply and demand company.
C. On the other hand, on June 15, 2010, the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for landscaping works among the instant original construction works (hereinafter “instant construction works”).
The Plaintiff completed the instant construction work around November 2010, but did not receive KRW 74,360,000 for the subcontract price.
E. Accordingly, on September 30, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the payment of the said subcontract price (this court’s 201Da355592, hereinafter “instant prior lawsuit”).
F. During the lawsuit in question, the Plaintiff and the Defendant Seosan confirmed the subcontract price of KRW 41,061,350, which was calculated by deducting the liquidated damages from the subcontract price of the above subcontract price of KRW 33,298,650, and the Plaintiff withdrawn the said lawsuit on April 27, 2012, and the Defendant Seosan paid the Plaintiff the said subcontract price of KRW 17,656,380 (=41,061,350x 0.43) equivalent to the investment rate of Defendant Seosan among the above subcontract price of April 30, 2012.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 9 (including attachment of provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1, 2, 4, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. Since a joint contractor basically has the nature of a partnership under the Civil Act, if one of the members was in the position of a manager as a representative of a joint contractor, the joint contractor for judgment on the cause of the claim between the members and the manager of the partnership under the Civil Act.