logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.10.15 2018나36692
노임 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's claim expanded by this court are dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, as a manager in the corporate register of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”), worked as a civil engineering engineer on the corporate register for the purpose of soil construction business, etc. The Defendant is a stock company with the purpose of construction business.

B. The Defendant was awarded a contract for construction work (hereinafter “instant construction work”) from the Seoul Metropolitan City Mayor, Nam-gu Office with respect to a project to improve a steep slope at risk of collapse in the Nam-gu, Gwangju Metropolitan City.

C. On July 20, 2017, the Defendant entered into a subcontract with I Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “I”) on the installation of retaining walls among the instant construction works, as follows:

The following types of work: Construction period of the OBW retaining wall: The contract amount of KRW 90,600,000 on July 21, 2017; and August 31, 2017: 89.37% (based on recognition): there is no dispute; evidence No. 10; evidence No. 10; evidence No. 14-1, 5, No. 14-2, No. 10-1, 2, and No. 11-1 of evidence No. 10; the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The purchase price according to the subcontract agreement was subcontracted for the instant construction work by the director D of the defendant company and completed the construction work by investing the plaintiff's expenses. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff wage and the price of materials invested by the plaintiff as asserted in paragraph 2 (2) below.

2. On February 2017, immediately after the Defendant ordered the instant construction from the Southern-gu Office of Gwangju, the Plaintiff was running only D, a director of the Defendant Company, at the construction site of this case where the Plaintiff would be entitled to receive orders under the name of G having beneficial ownership. On April 2017, the Plaintiff would first receive a request from D to work as the site manager of the instant construction site and would receive only a panel-type retaining wall construction from D, and accepted the duties of the site manager. The Plaintiff was working as the site manager of the instant construction site, while serving as the site manager of the instant construction site.

arrow