beta
Text
1. The defendant's decision to recommend the settlement of construction cost case No. 2010Gahap3376 against the plaintiff of Busan District Court.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On July 14, 2010, the Seowon General Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seowon General Construction”) filed a lawsuit against 29 persons including the Plaintiff (Seoul District Court Branch Branch Branch 2010Gahap3376) for the payment of construction cost. Of the above lawsuit, the part between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff was paid KRW 1,371,00,000 to each Plaintiff by September 1, 201. If the Defendants delayed the payment, the settlement recommendation (hereinafter “instant settlement recommendation”) was concluded to the effect that “The payment of the unpaid amount shall be made by adding the damages for delay calculated at 20% per annum from the date following the date of payment to the date of full payment.”
B. On May 16, 2012, the construction of the Seowon General Construction, “1. Seowon General Construction,” as between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, decides to waive or withdraw the claims finalized by the settlement recommendation of this case, and the execution of compulsory auction by official auction by official. 2. On May 16, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Seowon General Construction, as the Plaintiff borrowed from the Seowon General Construction, Seowon General Construction, 60,000,000, Seowon General Construction, which was borrowed from the Seowon General Construction, shall not divulge to the time of the modification from the Seowon General Construction to other construction works, and shall respectively prepare an agreement to keep one copy of the agreement.
(C) On February 12, 2018, the Defendant received the credit confirmed by the decision of recommending the settlement of this case from the Construction of the Seowon General Construction on the same day. [The reasons for recognition are as follows: A-1-1, 2, 3, A-1, 2, 3, and A-1, 2, and 3-1, 2, and 3-1, 2, and 3-1, 3, respectively, and the purport of the entire pleadings.
2. Determination
A. The plaintiff asserts that 60,000,000 won shall be paid for the Seocho-gu Construction and was exempted from the obligation based on the decision on the recommendation for reconciliation in this case. The defendant asserted that the Seocho-gu Construction was merely borrowed the above 60,000,000 won from the plaintiff. Therefore, it is viewed as the above.
B. Article 2 of the Agreement of this case, "General Construction" borrowed.