logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.08.13 2018가단325239
공사대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. D, with the trade name of “C”, contracted the Defendant with the construction of E-House.

B. On February 11, 2016, the Defendant subcontracted the construction price of KRW 170,00,000, and the deadline for completion to the Plaintiff as of August 30, 2016, with respect to the construction of joint land, drawing, and floor board (hereinafter “instant construction”) among the construction of the said apartment (hereinafter “instant construction”).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant subcontract”). (c)

The Plaintiff started the instant construction work and completed the instant construction work on August 30, 2016, and transferred the construction site to the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 5 evidence (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant, who is a subcontractor under the subcontract of this case, is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff, the subcontractor, the construction cost of this case, KRW 170,000,000, and damages for delay.

B. Since the Defendant’s assertion D and the Plaintiff, the principal contractor, and the subcontractor, agreed to pay the instant construction cost directly to the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s obligation to pay the construction cost to the Plaintiff was extinguished in accordance with Article 14 of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act (hereinafter “subcontract”).

3. Determination

A. If the purport of the entire argument is added to each of the statements in this case’s evidence Nos. 3, 3, 1 through 3, and 6, the Defendant entered into the instant subcontract with the method of entrusting the Plaintiff among the said new apartment construction contract that was contracted by the ordering person D as a small and medium enterprise owner with more than the Plaintiff and with more annual sales than the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff and the Defendant provided that D, the ordering person, shall be directly paid to the Plaintiff according to the nature of the contract (Article 6), D, the Defendant, and the Defendant.

arrow