(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.04.19 2016나57735

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.04.19 2016나57735

사용료

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is rendered on January 1, 2015.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the statements and arguments set forth in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 7, and 8, the plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the defendant on September 1, 2015 on construction machinery for the lease of equipment, such as a flag, from September 2, 2015 to November 21, 2015; the plaintiff puts equipment and drivers such as a flag and dump, etc. into the construction site designated by the defendant, such as the flag military unit at the site designated by the defendant from Sep. 2, 2015 to Nov. 21, 2015; thereby, there was a total of 35,160,675 won, such as equipment rent and personnel expenses, etc. (for the work of October 5, 2015, the plaintiff calculated by applying the unit cost table of construction machinery leased in 2015 to the head of the headquarters after obtaining confirmation from the defendant on the part of the plaintiff's work.

“In the event that the equipment of the other company was put into the construction site of the defendant is not based on a separate contract between the defendant and the other company, but the plaintiff leased equipment from other company to implement the contract with the defendant and puts the equipment of the other company into the defendant. Since the lease contract does not require that the object of the lease is owned by the lessor, it is reasonable to view that the plaintiff can claim the user fee for the use of equipment of the other company to the defendant

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

(B) Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff fees of KRW 35,160,675 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from December 29, 2015 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the day when the original copy of the instant payment order was served to the Defendant, as the Plaintiff seeks.

2. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is justified.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원 2019.10.30 2019고단854

-수원지방법원 2017.10.12 2016나74682

-부산지방법원 2017.02.07 2015가단67853

-창원지방법원 2016.10.21 2015가단86738

-부산지방법원 2016.9.22. 선고 2016구합1111 판결