logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.08.20 2018나7341
카드이용대금 등
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On April 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant subcontracted the portion of steel structure construction among the construction works at pressures and pumping stations of the D rural water use system rearrangement and pumping stations located in the city of official city ordered by the Korea Rural Community Corporation from C to the Korea Rural Community Corporation, and the Plaintiff would be responsible for manufacturing steel structure, and the Defendant would be responsible for the construction of steel structure produced by the Defendant; the Defendant promised the Plaintiff to pay the equipment cost to the Plaintiff, and used the credit card loan from the Plaintiff in Chapter 2; the credit card price of each credit card was KRW 874,80,7326,443; the Plaintiff lent the credit card price of each credit card to the Defendant on May 30, 2017; the fact that the Defendant did not return the equipment rent from the Plaintiff to the Defendant on May 30, 2017; the fact that there was no dispute between the parties, or that the entire arguments were recognized by comprehensively taking account of the purport of each evidence set forth in subparagraphs 1, 2, and 3.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 9,311,243 won (=874,800 won 7,326,443 won 500,000 won) and damages for delay.

2. Judgment as to the defendant's claim for offset

A. As to this, if the Defendant offsets against the Defendant’s claims against the Plaintiff by its automatic claim, the Defendant’s counterclaims to the effect that all of the Plaintiff’s above claims were extinguished.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments in the testimony of witness E of the party concerned, a part of the steel structure in the manufacture of steel structure according to the above subcontract construction contract is not melting with the design, and a part of the steel structure is provided to the defendant without manufacturing it according to the design. Accordingly, the defendant installed the defective steel structure and demolished it again and re- installed the steel structure from the plaintiff. This is the plaintiff's defect.

arrow