logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.02.18 2018가단5143878
공사대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. A. On December 2017, the Defendant contracted to C with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City D’s order expansion works (hereinafter “each of the instant construction works”), and the Plaintiff supplied C with each of the instant construction sites necessary goods, such as structural lectures, etc.

B. On March 9, 2018, three persons, including the Defendant, the contractor C, and the Plaintiff, etc., agreed that the subcontractor shall pay the subcontractor the contract price directly.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant direct payment agreement”). Construction name (hereinafter referred to as “the instant direct payment agreement”): D the expansion thereof, E the expansion thereof, and F Neighborhood Park: the contract period of KRW 67,567,720 (including value added tax): From January 31, 2018 to March 31, 2018: The special agreement is limited to the amount of material cost supplied by the subcontractor to the items manufactured by the subcontractor.

1. Payment of materials costs supplied by subcontractors from the amount claimed for D term;

2. Direct disposal of subcontractor's supply materials, based on the field and height of each construction site.

C. On April 13, 2018, the Defendant paid KRW 14,956,920 to the Plaintiff as part of the price under the instant direct payment agreement.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) As the cause of the instant claim, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 52,611,680,680 (=67,568,600-14,956,920) remaining after deducting KRW 14,920 from the amount of KRW 67,56,60 pursuant to the instant direct payment agreement, which was actually incurred by the Defendant, from the amount of KRW 67,56,60 (i.e., KRW 67,568,60-14,956,920). As to this, the Defendant, as stated in the instant direct payment agreement, may be directly paid only to the amount of material cost supplied at each construction site operated by the Defendant, and it is not clear that the Plaintiff supplied the material at each construction site of this case, and 2) agreed to withdraw the instant direct payment

B. Judgment 1 on the issues, Gap, No. 25, and No. 25.

arrow