logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.01.29 2015가합103600
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On the construction site of CAR LIFT remodeling (Special Type D3): Total value of 118,00,000 won: 129,800,000 won (including VT) due date for payment: July 30, 2010; the scope of the construction to be performed by the defendant under this contract and other detailed details shall be based on the estimate.

Article 7 (Construction of Contract Provisions) Matters not specified in this Agreement shall be determined through mutual consultation according to general commercial practices. (a)

On May 6, 2010, the original Defendant entered into the following contracts with respect to parking facilities of the Plaintiff’s parking building located in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D:

(hereinafter “instant contract” and “the instant construction” and “the instant parking facility,” which is the object of the instant contract, B.

On November 1, 201, where the Defendant had been performing the instant construction, B, at the time of the Plaintiff’s representative director, prepared a written confirmation of the work that “it shall not be held liable to the Defendant and the Soft Technology Co., Ltd., Ltd., the Maintenance and Repair Agency, for any accident that occurred due to the Defendant’s failure to obtain knowledge of the method of use, specifications, and specifications of the safety center in order to place the vehicle that is not originally usable at the Plaintiff’s request, although the safety center is established so that the Defendant may safely enter and exit the vehicle at the time of the initial installation of the car at the time of the instant construction, the location of the safety center is changed to put the vehicle other than the possible size.”

C. B, at the time of the Plaintiff’s representative director, signed on December 3, 2010, the construction period of the instant construction work was from June 1, 2010 to November 29, 2010.

The Plaintiff paid the construction cost under the instant contract to the Defendant around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and arguments.

arrow