logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.01.27 2015가단5131812
물품대금
Text

1. Defendant Heavy Construction Co., Ltd.: (a) KRW 17,229,560 for the Plaintiff and its related amount from January 1, 2015 to May 19, 2015.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant Drie Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Drie Construction”) was awarded a contract for the Construction Work B (hereinafter “instant Construction”) from the Young City Corporation, and re-subcontracted to Defendant Dan Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Dun Construction”).

B. On August 19, 2013, CK Co., Ltd. was decided to commence rehabilitation procedures and appoint A as a custodian (Cheongju District Court 2013 Gohap7).

C. Around April 2, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a supply contract with Defendant Heavy Construction and supplied concrete products equivalent to the total amount of KRW 223,792,360 (including value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) at the instant construction site by October 31, 2014.

From July 2014 to October 2014, Defendant Heavy Construction paid a total of KRW 101,943,160 to the price for the goods supplied by the Plaintiff.

E. On November 19, 2014, with respect to the equipment and material payment of the Defendant Heavy Construction, the Young Urban Corporation agreed to terminate the direct payment of the subcontract price (hereinafter “instant agreement”) with the aim of preventing the Defendant Heavy Construction from directly paying the subcontract price to the subcontractor pursuant to Article 35(5) of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

- Major contents of the Agreement on the Termination of Direct Payment of Subcontract Price (Evidence A 4)

2. The termination of the direct payment of the subcontract price refers to the works that Eul (this case’s Defendant Drie Construction) and Byung (this case’s Defendant Due Construction) entered into a subcontract and notify Gap (the case’s Maul City Construction) (the case’s Maul Construction) of the subcontract agreement.

3. The termination of direct payment of subcontract consideration shall be from the date of conclusion of this Agreement, and the amount of termination of direct payment shall be the remaining fixed amount after the date of conclusion of this Agreement.

Provided, That where an increase or decrease occurs due to a design change, etc., it shall be the amount of increase or decrease.

4. Soldiers shall conclude this Agreement.

arrow