logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원진주지원 2014.02.12 2013가단5745
공사대금
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 42,00,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its amount from May 31, 2013 to February 12, 2014.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 27, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a contract with the Plaintiff to set the construction cost of KRW 440,000,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. The Plaintiff completed the instant construction, and the Defendant paid KRW 393,00,000 to the Plaintiff out of the construction cost of the instant case.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. (1) According to the facts of finding the judgment on the principal claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 47,000,000 ( KRW 440,000,000-393,00,000) and damages for delay, barring any special circumstance.

(2) (A) The defendant's assertion on the defense of the deduction (A) was required for the defect repair cost of KRW 113,775,160 due to the plaintiff's defect in the construction of this case, and the plaintiff is obligated to pay the defect repair cost to the defendant, and the defendant asserts that the defect repair cost should be deducted from

(B) Among the defects claimed by the Defendant in determining the elevator defects, the defects that occurred in the elevator are attributable to the Plaintiff’s instant construction work. Thus, the above defects are deemed defects due to the Plaintiff’s instant construction work. However, it is not sufficient to recognize the Defendant’s assertion that the above defect repair cost is KRW 8,500,000, only with the entries in the evidence Nos. 3 and 4, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the above defect repair cost may be acknowledged within the scope of KRW 5,00,000, which the Plaintiff is the Plaintiff.

(C) We examine other defects other than defects claimed by the defendant, among defects claimed by the defendant.

According to the overall purport of Eul evidence No. 2’s video and pleading, it can be recognized that defects, such as leakage, etc., have occurred in the object of the instant construction work.

arrow