logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2021.01.12 2020가단265550
확정제공금 청구
Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 3, 2019, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant and the Dog Dog Kag Dog Dog Dog Dog (hereinafter “instant removal works”) operated on the second floor in Yangcheon-gu Seoul, Seoul (hereinafter “the instant removal works”) and with respect to the removal of the Eth Dog Dog Dog Dog Dog Dog Dog (hereinafter “the instant interior works”), with the contract amount of KRW 12,00,000, 56,000, and Dog Dog la Corporation with respect to the estimate of the attached specifications and calculation of the attached specifications, from June 4, 2019 to July 10, 2019.

B. On June 4, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 15,000,000 to the Defendant an increase of KRW 3,000,000 for the cost of restoration from the cost of removal on June 15, 2019, and paid KRW 20,00,00 for the part payment of the interior work.

(c)

The Defendant presented to the Plaintiff an estimate of KRW 1,300,00 for soundproofing gate work, KRW 800,00 for the inner walls and door work, KRW 1,400,00 for the Kafa, and KRW 1,450,00 for the Kafa, and agreed on the actual construction work’s content as KRW 2,60,000.

(d)

On June 28, 2019, the Defendant suspended the instant interior works, and the Plaintiff would terminate the contract as of July 2, 2019 to the Defendant on July 5, 2019.

Around that time, the defendant was notified of the person, and the defendant was bound by the work site.

E. On September 30, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the lessor F of the carpet subject to the removal of the instant case with Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2019Ga group 243837, and the conciliation was concluded to receive KRW 96,350,000, which deducts KRW 3,650,000 of the cost of restoration from the KRW 100,000,000, out of the lease deposit of KRW 100,000.

F. In relation to the instant interior project, the part of the Defendant’s construction works rendered by the U.S. is identical to the unexecution details on the table of calculation of the attached specifications.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 10 through 12 (including various numbers if there are numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and 14 through 16, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Defendant’s objection.

arrow