beta
Text
1. All incidental appeals regarding the principal lawsuit by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the counterclaim by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows. Thus, the reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of some of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of
[Attachment] The fourth 3rd Doz. [Attachment 8] The fourth Doz. [Attachment 8] is regarded as “7.”
The fourth 8th Class "30,000 won" is considered as "5,00 won."
The 7th parallel 200 million won is raised as "in 50 million," respectively.
The phrase “ these circumstances” in Part 7 is deemed to read “such circumstances and the statement of the evidence No. 16”.
Article 3-B(2) of the Civil Code No. 7, 10, 11, 3, 12 through 15, and 17 through 22 are as follows: (1) The following circumstances are revealed in light of the overall purport of the pleadings: (2) on April 1, 2010, the Defendant awarded a contract for construction works excluding fire-fighting construction works, etc. among the construction works of the new building of this case to the Sejong River Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “Seo River Corporation”) on June 1, 2010, for the construction works of this case, KRW 7.5 billion (excluding value-added tax).
(2) On December 8, 2010, when the peaceful Housing Construction was unable to pay the purchase price to the Defendant on a timely basis, it shall be paid to the Defendant through a chemical banking as compensation for delay, and on December 8, 2010, when preparing a construction contract for the said new construction project, it shall be paid to the Plaintiff KRW 520,000,000 from the said new construction project to the Defendant to receive KRW 50,000,000 from the Plaintiff as the contract deposit for the said construction project, and the Defendant actually agreed to pay it to the Defendant on January 31, 201.