logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 장흥지원 2018.08.21 2017가합641
용역비
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that engages in road and airport design business, etc., and the Defendant is a company that engages in real estate development planning and consulting business.

B. On February 2, 2009, the Republic of Korea and the Defendant entered into a MOU agreement on the E regional development project (hereinafter “instant project”); around August 2009, after completing feasibility studies and establishment of a basic plan, on the said project site, obtained approval from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport on December 201 from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport on the said project site; and obtained approval of the development plan (revision) from the Jeonnam-do on April 201.

C. On September 12, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant formed an agreement with the FF Co., Ltd. to form a consortium and entered into the agreement for the instant project. The Defendant, a member of the consortium, as a consortium, was in charge of the implementation and overall control of the instant project, management and operation of the sales business, business coordination, etc. as a consortium, and the Plaintiff decided to take charge of all affairs related to the authorization and permission of the instant project, working design, and engineering.

On October 8, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for permission to engage in development of 30,000 square meters (the first phase district) among the model districts for the instant project (the completion of permission for development) and an implementation plan for the remaining 24.80,000 square meters (hereinafter “instant main contract”) with the content that “the contract for permission to engage in development activities of the E demonstration district and for the establishment of the district unit planning (the “instant main contract”)” (the contract amount of KRW 1.3 billion) and the contract term from October 8, 2013 to June 7, 2014. On July 25, 2014, the contract term of the said contract was changed from October 8, 2013 to December 15, 2014.

E. On November 26, 2013, the Plaintiff concluded the air survey service contract with the Defendant for the instant project (hereinafter “instant air survey service contract”) by setting the contract amount of KRW 198,500,000 (Additional dues) and the contract period from November 26, 2013 to June 7, 2014.

F. The defendant of this case.

arrow