(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.03.26 2014나55296

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) 서울남부지방법원 2015.03.26 2014나55296

채무부존재확인

Text

1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the instant principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be the principal lawsuit.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 2, 2013, the Defendant publicly announced an electronic bid for facility construction works (hereinafter “instant bidding”) to select the Defendant’s employees accommodation construction project (hereinafter “instant construction project”) located in Busan-gu, Busan-do, 1469-4 (hereinafter “instant bidding”), the Defendant announced that ① the estimated construction amount (including the basic amount, value added tax) is 1.896 billion won, ② the total tender amount is subject to the total tender without attaching a statement of calculation in the tender; ③ the payment of bid deposit is substituted by the payment notice of the electronic bid document by the Public Procurement Service, and ③ the bid deposit is reverted to the Defendant under Article 38 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Contracts to Which the State is a Party, and ④ the instant construction project is omitted and substituted by the design and the site site inspection.

B. The Plaintiff participated in the instant bidding until January 13, 2014, which was the final date for the bid, and was selected as a business entity subject to the qualification examination. The Plaintiff’s tender submitted by the Plaintiff states that “The Plaintiff will immediately pay the bid bond to the Defendant in cash upon the Defendant’s request, if there occurs any cause attributable to the national treasury because the Plaintiff failed to conclude the contract after being selected as the successful bidder in the instant bidding without justifiable grounds.”

C. The defendant for the same year

2. Around April, 200, the Plaintiff notified the Plaintiff of the fact that the contract for the construction work of this case was concluded by the 6th day of the same month. However, the Plaintiff did not comply with the conclusion of the contract for the construction work of this case without justifiable grounds, and the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to pay KRW 82,124,785 as a bid bond around the 12th day of the same month on the grounds that the Plaintiff did not conclude the contract for the construction work of this case, and

참조조문

-국가를 당사자로 하는 계약에 관한 법률 시행령 제38조

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2014.11.11 2014가단205458

-서울행정법원 2019.08.16 2019구합60127

-대전지방법원홍성지원 2017.08.22 2016가단12151

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.05.16 2018나75353

-서울남부지방법원 2020.02.12 2019가단2098