(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.01.13 2015나48495

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.01.13 2015나48495

약정금

Text

1. The part against the plaintiff falling under the following order of payment among the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked:

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 24, 2014, the Defendant was awarded a subcontract for installation and removal (hereinafter “instant construction”) among the construction works in Ulsan-gu Officetel, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-gu Ctel. On October 24, 2014, the Defendant: (a) concluded an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff on the efficiency and salary of the parts regarding equipment work (e.g., removal and waste) during the subcontracted construction; (b) from October 20, 2014 to November 20, 2014; (c) determined the rate of liquidated damages to be 0.1% per day (hereinafter “instant agreement”); and (d) paid to the Plaintiff KRW 10 million in total by the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendant entered into a subcontract on the premise that the scrap (which means waste scrap metal generated in the process of removal) deposited at the construction site in the previous construction site was used by the Defendant (the Defendant, as the document written by the Defendant, used the expression “term of redemption at high expense” in the document No. 3-4 of the document written by the Defendant). Upon the transfer of the ownership of scrap, the Defendant decided to change the subcontract amount from KRW 195 million to KRW 230 million in the previous construction site by reflecting the fact that the ownership of scrap was transferred to D, the owner of the building.

In addition, the Defendant demanded the Daijin Construction to take the above solid materials out at the site, and the instant construction began, and there occurred a problem such as the suspension of construction several times due to the said solid materials not taken out at the site. The Defendant asserted that the construction cost is increased due to the failure to take the said solid materials out at the end of November 2014, and that the Defendant demanded to prepare a written confirmation of the cost of taking out the solid materials and taking out the scrap from the Daijin Construction.

C. On December 19, 2014, J of the Defendant’s On-the-spot Director is difficult to proceed with the site by the Defendant’s input of excessive construction costs into the site warden.

유사 판례

-광주고등법원 2016.04.22 2015나1177

-전주지방법원 정읍지원 2019.05.16 2019고단9

-광주지방법원순천지원 2015.08.27 2015가단1059

-부산지방법원 2015.10.08 2015가단202854

-대구지방법원 2017.05.24 2016나312729