logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2017.10.18 2016가단73835
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 24,104,00 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from March 7, 2017 to October 18, 2017.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be acknowledged in light of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Gap evidence Nos. 7-1, 2, Gap evidence Nos. 8-1, 2, and 9, and Gap evidence Nos. 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings at the video Nos. 14, and there is no counter-proof.

On August 5, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant on August 5, 2015, under which the period of construction of the parts of the cream works among the said remodeling works is from August 5, 2015 to August 25, 2015, and the construction cost is 48,400,000 won (including value-added tax) for the subcontract (hereinafter “instant subcontract”).

B. The said construction cost under the instant subcontract was determined as the construction cost of KRW 4.7 million (excluding value-added tax), the pipeline installation construction cost of KRW 4.7 million (excluding value-added tax), the inland joint plate construction cost of KRW 4.0 million (excluding value-added tax), the ice construction cost of KRW 30,842,750 (excluding value-added tax), the ice construction cost of KRW 30,842,750 (excluding value-added tax), and the combined construction cost of KRW 3,294,00 (excluding value-added tax).

C. On August 7, 2015, the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant an advance payment of KRW 8 million, and paid the construction cost of KRW 22 million on September 15, 2015. On September 1, 2015, the Plaintiff, who was liable to the Plaintiff, directly paid KRW 5,104,00 to D who was sub-subcontracted the pipe construction part from the Defendant, thereby eventually making the Defendant pay KRW 35,104,00 ( KRW 8 million) to the Defendant.

However, the Defendant only performed a pipe installation work, a water-resistant joint construction work, and a water-proof area construction work among the subcontracted works in the instant case, without performing all operations after the ice construction work, and the Plaintiff, on September 21, 2015, awarded a subcontract to a domestic public-service corporation for a new construction work after the ice construction work.

arrow