beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff owned a single-story building adjacent to Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and D (hereinafter “instant building”).
However, around March 1971 and around June 1987, the building of this case was set up and supported by the old building, which became a tree in the inside of the building so that the building does not collapse.
In this regard, there was a need for remuneration or new construction.
B. On October 24, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant B and the instant building, which requires that the amount of KRW 110 million should be paid immediately from October 24, 2014 to November 24, 2014, and KRW 50 million in advance (hereinafter “instant construction”). Around that time, the Plaintiff paid KRW 50 million in advance to the Defendant B.
C. On November 10, 2014, the instant construction was commenced and has been suspended on the ground that the removal was not reported by the Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office, the competent authority.
After that, the new construction work was conducted and the second floor building was newly built on the site in April 2016.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 6, 9-12, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 3-1, 2, Eul evidence 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) First of all, the instant construction work is not a construction work of constructing a new building after demolishing the existing building, but a construction work of improving only the remainder of the building as it is. 2) In concluding the instant construction contract with Defendant B, the Plaintiff agreed to perform the construction work by removing and constructing two existing columns in the order of two parts, which are tanks with the instant building, while concluding the instant construction contract with Defendant B.
However, Defendant B’s removal of the existing columns at once for the convenience of the construction without complying with this, and all of the instant buildings.