(영문) 광주지방법원 2014.01.09 2013가합53955

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) 광주지방법원 2014.01.09 2013가합53955

물품대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. (1) On April 1, 2010, the Defendant entered into a construction contract with B (hereinafter “B”) by setting the construction cost of KRW 1,727,00,000, and the construction period from April 1, 2012 to April 30, 2013 with respect to the construction work for cooperation on the spot and for the installation and supply of smoke-based pipelines (hereinafter “instant construction work”).

(2) On July 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a supply contract with B with respect to virtue necessary for the instant construction project (hereinafter “instant supply contract”). Around that time, the Plaintiff supplied virtue to B.

B. (1) During the process of preparing the payment guarantee letter (1) while the Plaintiff was unable to receive the virtue payment under the instant supply contract from B, the Plaintiff prepared the payment guarantee letter (hereinafter “instant payment guarantee”) on November 30, 2012 and demanded D to sign it. The key content of the instant payment guarantee letter is as follows. The lower part of the said payment guarantee letter is as follows: (i) seal impression sheet and ② corporate director attachment.

( Note)A (Plaintiff) guarantees that, in the event of an outstanding amount, the payment shall not be made to B, which is an enterprise with virtue under the contract, and that, in the event of an outstanding amount, it shall be paid directly to the C (Plaintiff) who is an enterprise with virtue under the contract, to pay the outstanding amount for the payment of the proceeds of the necessary virtue products at the KOsan-si Construction Project (instant Construction) site.

1. The scope of guarantee: From the supply to the completion date of construction works on August 6, 2012, the scope of guarantee shall be limited to the joint venture;

2. Price settlement method: (2) D refused to the effect that the approval of the defendant is necessary for the above request of the plaintiff, but once signing is made and signing on the payment guarantee of this case at the request of the plaintiff that approval is obtained from the defendant later.

(3) D shall transmit the instant payment guarantee to the Defendant immediately after signing.

유사 판례

-광주고등법원 2015.03.27 2014나10440

-서울고등법원 2016.03.24 2015나2045657

-의정부지방법원 2020.09.24 2019가단13988

-창원지방법원 2017.10.31 2017나173

-대전지방법원 2015.07.30 2014가단231245