logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안양지원 2016.04.14 2015가단13599
공사대금
Text

1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 28,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from May 11, 2015 to June 9, 2015; and (b) June 10, 2015.

Reasons

1. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. On August 29, 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant and completed the construction work by setting the construction cost of KRW 134,70,000 for the tin reconstruction project (hereinafter “instant stone reconstruction project”) among the construction works executed by the Defendant on the ground of 9-24, Gangseo-gu, Gangseo-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant stone reconstruction project”). The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid construction cost of KRW 28,00,000 and damages for delay.

B. The written contract (Evidence A No. 1) signed on August 29, 2014 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on August 29, 2014 is merely a formality. The first construction cost of the instant tin was KRW 77.1 million, and thereafter, the total construction cost of the said tin was changed to KRW 88.8 million due to the occurrence of an additional construction cost equivalent to KRW 11.7 million due to the modification of a design. The Defendant paid KRW 16 million as the construction cost to the Plaintiff from October 17, 2014 to February 10, 2015, instead, paid KRW 17.2 million as the construction cost to the Plaintiff.

2. As long as the establishment of the original disposal document is recognized as authentic, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposal document, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof as to the denial of the contents of the statement.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da6753 Decided June 11, 2002, etc.). Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including evidence attached with serial numbers), the Plaintiff was to perform the instant stone construction work from the Defendant to the second floor of the new building at the time of the first contract with the Defendant, but later changed the details of the construction work to implement the instant stone construction work to the fifth floor of the new building. Ultimately, around August 29, 2014, the date of commencement between the Defendant and the Defendant around September 29, 2014; the date of completion; the construction work cost is KRW 1347 million; and the construction cost is paid in cash after ten days.

arrow