logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.11.10 2015가단53970
추가간접비 청구
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 8, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the supply and demand of A waterworks stabilization works (hereinafter “instant construction works”) by setting the construction period from May 13, 2013 to December 8, 2013 (210 days).

B. While the Plaintiff was carrying out the instant construction, the instant construction section came into contact with the Ulsan Intersection connection road where modern construction was in progress.

The defendant tried to coordinate the progress of modern construction and construction, and the construction of this case did not proceed as scheduled.

C. The instant construction was completed on December 24, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. (i) The instant construction period of Plaintiff 1 had been extended by 381 days prior to the scheduled construction period without the Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s fault.

The plaintiff continued to place one on-site agent at the construction site of this case, and the on-site agent has reported to the defendant through the defendant's CITS system while managing and controlling the overall site.

The additional costs incurred to the Plaintiff during the period of 381 days for additional construction are KRW 54,762,359, other expenses, including site managers’ wages and site rents, KRW 2,498,60, and KRW 1,491,100, employment insurance premium, KRW 318,370, general management expenses, KRW 2,987,037, and KRW 6,840,316, and KRW 1,413,540, and KRW 21,545,040. Accordingly, the Defendant calculated the additional construction period for 128 days and recognized KRW 21,76,284, including site managers’ wages and site rents (=70, KRW 311,324-21,545,040), and delay damages therefrom.

B. On December 19, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to increase the construction period of 128 days during which actual input is confirmed based on the work day report objectively recognized.

In accordance with the agreement, the defendant shall complete the construction work of this case and pay the construction cost.

arrow