logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.01.13 2016가합101468
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The part of the claim for the confirmation of the existence of an obligation among the lawsuits in this case shall be dismissed.

2. The Defendant’s KRW 27,095,850 and KRW 27,00 from the Plaintiffs.

Reasons

Basic Facts

Around December 2012, C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C”) contracted with D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”) to construct “F” (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”), an urban-type residential housing, on the land (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction site”), and completed the instant construction work on June 19, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction work”).

Around February 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract with C to supply ready-mixed at the construction site of this case and began to supply ready-mixed from February 25, 2013.

Plaintiff B, a joint owner of the instant building, which is a corporation H (hereinafter “H”), executor, and Plaintiff B, a joint owner of the instant building, operated by G, the representative director of the Si Corporation C, jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s obligation to pay for the above ready-mixed.

From February 25, 2013 to May 19, 2014, the Defendant supplied ready-mixeds equivalent to KRW 382,196,100 (including value-added tax) at the construction site of this case as follows:

On February 2013, 2013, May 2013, 2013: (a) on June 2013, 36,347,520 64,597,597,830,621,8204,117,160 57,796,640,64053,919,360 delivered on October 2013, 2013, the Defendant continued to supply containers from around 35,816,00,005,100,1025,10,107, 20817, 20817, 207, 20817, 207, 3618, 208, 2017, 35, 203, 2013.

Accordingly, in order for C to secure the Defendant’s obligation to receive the payment of ready-mixed to be supplied by the Defendant during the construction site of this case, the Plaintiff A, the wife of D representative director I, shall be as to the amount of J 509 square meters per annum as indicated in the attached Table No. 1, while the Plaintiff B, as to the amount of 16,066 square meters per annum as indicated in the attached Table No. 2, 166 square meters per annum as indicated in the attached Table No. 2.

arrow