(영문) 대전지방법원공주지원 2015.10.14 2015재가합18

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) 대전지방법원공주지원 2015.10.14 2015재가합18

공사대금

Text

1. The quasi-examination of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of quasi-examination shall be borne by the conciliation intervenor.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff, which is subject to quasi-examination, filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking payment of the construction cost as stated in this Court’s 2012Gahap491.

On March 12, 2013, the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the Mediation Intervenor (hereinafter “Mediation Intervenor”) (hereinafter “Mediation Intervenor”) were mediated as follows on the date of mediation of the said litigation.

1. The conciliation intervenor shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 78,00,000,000, which shall be paid to the Plaintiff, and KRW 25,000,000 shall be paid KRW 25,000 until March 31, 2013, KRW 25,000 until April 30, 2013, and KRW 28,00,000 until May 31, 2013. If the conciliation intervenor delays the payment of the above amount at once, he/she shall lose the benefit of time, and shall pay the unpaid amount in addition to delay damages at the rate of KRW 20% per annum from the day after delay until the day of complete payment.

2. By March 15, 2013, the Plaintiff withdraws the application for provisional seizure of each land owned by a person other than the Defendant among each land divided from the land divided from the land of official city D, the object of which the provisional seizure of real estate was applied for by this Court No. 2012Kahap75, which is the object of the provisional seizure application, and cancels its execution.

3. The Plaintiff shall provide the co-litigants with data on the location and quantity of soil and sand taken out at the construction site of this case.

4. The plaintiff waives his claim against the defendant.

5. The costs of lawsuit and the costs of mediation shall be borne respectively;

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, the purport of whole pleading

2. Judgment as to the existence of a ground for quasi-examination

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant did not receive KRW 118,643,750 from March 14, 2012 at the site of civil construction work for the creation of the D Land Site at the time of public offering (hereinafter “instant construction work”) and filed a claim for the payment of the construction cost against the Defendant.

However, the Plaintiff had already been aware of the soil at the construction site of this case and paid the entertainment price to the neighboring land.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원공주지원 2015.10.14 2015재가합25

-대전지방법원 공주지원 2017.03.30 2016가단22393

-대전지방법원 2017.12.14 2017나104482

-서울서부지방법원 2015.06.11 2015재가합12

-대전지방법원 2020.02.12 2019재가단31