(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.06.10 2015나9505 | 리걸엔진

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) 광주지방법원 2016.06.10 2015나9505

공사대금 등

Text

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 2,560,000 and shall also pay to the plaintiff on October 2012.

Reasons

1. The fact that the Plaintiff contracted with the Defendant to perform the mold construction work (hereinafter “instant construction work”) from among the new construction works of the E-Bath E funeral hall in the Simpo-si. The fact that the Plaintiff performed construction work from July 14, 2012 to September 30, 2012 does not conflict between the parties.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s construction cost of this case agreed to pay the amount as claimed by the Plaintiff, and that the construction cost claimed by the Plaintiff is KRW 86,157,500,000, and only KRW 54,000, and the balance of the construction cost is not paid KRW 32,157,500. Thus, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the above KRW 32,157,50, and delay damages therefrom.

(Plaintiff requested payment of 7,350,000 won in the first instance court, but the court below did not request the payment of wages by changing the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim.

The Defendant alleged that the Plaintiff and the construction cost were KRW 70,560,000 (i.e., KRW 120,000 per square year x 588), and the Plaintiff paid KRW 14,00,000 as the construction cost on July 10, 2012, and thereafter, paid KRW 54,00,000 on several occasions, and the Plaintiff decided to settle the settlement that the Plaintiff paid the construction cost on behalf of the Defendant, and the remainder of KRW 560,000,000, to the Plaintiff was paid on behalf of the Defendant. As such, the Plaintiff did not have any obligation to pay the construction cost to the Plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. 1) Determination as to the cause of claim 1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant have the burden of proof as to the amount of the construction cost agreed upon between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff the amount claimed by the Plaintiff as the construction cost, as alleged by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff’s payment of KRW 86,157,50 to the Plaintiff was for the instant construction work.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원목포지원 2015.08.26 2015가단2513

-서울서부지방법원 2015.09.11 2014가단38237

-광주지방법원 해남지원 2018.02.23 2014가단5538

-광주고등법원(전주) 2015.09.17 2015나293

-광주지방법원 2016.10.12 2014가단18167