logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.04.17 2018나2040165
약정금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

2. The reasoning for this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Determination

(a) Evidence B Nos. 2, 8 through 20, 22 through 26 of the Costs of Civil Works Act (including the numbered number; hereinafter the same shall apply);

(A) In light of the following facts revealed by each description or image of the Defendant, witness N, C, M, andO’s testimony, the fact inquiry results on L of the court of first instance on L of the court of first instance, and the overall purport of pleading, it is difficult to view that the amount of the Defendant failed to submit or claimed evidence on “5,00,000 won for civil construction costs,” and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently. A) The witness C testified to the effect that “A and C had no intention to exchange the specific and approximate amount after settling it after the work in connection with M and the cost of civil construction,” but in light of the witness M and N’s testimony, the process of concluding the instant contract for civil construction works, the timing of payment of the construction cost, etc., the witness C’s testimony on the instant land was difficult to believe.

Considering the financial situation of C, a contract for civil works with the content that the construction cost is to be paid after the completion of the construction work was entered into.

B. M performed a civil construction work on the instant land from July 2016 to August of the same year under the said contract for the civil construction work. M demanded construction cost to C after completion of the said civil construction work, but M demanded payment of the cost of the civil construction work on the Defendant side, the owner of the instant land, who did not contact with C. On August 24, 2016. 56,000.

arrow