logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2017.10.26 2016가단72880
공사대금
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 10,054,914 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its amount from November 24, 2015 to October 26, 2017.

Reasons

1. Determination on the main claim

A. On July 2015, the Plaintiff received a contract with the Defendant for the construction cost of KRW 40,00,000,000 from the Seoyang-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D apartment and E Artificial Engineering Corporation (hereinafter “instant construction”). The Defendant received KRW 20,00,000 from the Defendant for the construction cost. The Plaintiff did not dispute between the parties who completed the instant construction work on August 2015, or recognized the overall purport of the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the construction cost of KRW 20,00,00 and delay damages.

B. In addition, during the construction period of this case, the Plaintiff requested the Plaintiff to install the original string, install the main string, replace the water pipe, replace the water pipe, and replace the 3,310,262 won in addition to the construction cost. Accordingly, the Plaintiff sought the return of the above unjust enrichment on the ground that the Defendant benefits the amount equivalent to the above amount without any legal ground, but there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

This part of the claim is not acceptable.

2. Determination on a counterclaim

A. The Defendant’s assertion 1) In contrast to the initial contract, the Plaintiff: (a) arbitrarily changed the construction of materials at a low level; (b) performed defective construction works; or (c) performed defective construction works; or (d) performed defective construction works; and (b) did not perform the construction work of the agreed part of the construction work, such as installation of indoor burners. Therefore, the Plaintiff is obliged to pay the Defendant the amount of KRW 42,260,051, including the total removal and re-construction cost, defective repair cost, non-construction cost, and delay damages incurred therefrom. (b) The Plaintiff is obligated to compensate the Defendant for the damages incurred therefrom, i.e., the total removal and re-construction cost, defect repair cost, and non-construction cost.

arrow