logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2016.03.30 2015가단204368
양수금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 9, 2014, the Defendant awarded a contract for the construction of the Changwon University Hospital, and subcontracted the part of the facility construction work to the non-party Shinyang Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “non-party company”) around January 9, 2014.

B. Around January 21, 2015, Nonparty Company was treated in default, and the Defendant notified Nonparty Company of the termination of a subcontract agreement and the implementation of a compromise settlement on the basis of January 20, 2015.

C. On February 16, 2015, the Plaintiff acquired the claim for the construction cost of KRW 448,998,000, which the Nonparty Company claims against the Defendant against the Defendant, and the Nonparty Company notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim on February 17, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant's unpaid amount is KRW 448,99,000, out of the construction cost that the defendant and the non-party company settled at the time of the non-party company's default.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that among the construction cost that was settled separately with the non-party company, the construction cost that the defendant did not pay to the non-party company was paid to the on-site workers in full with the consent of the non-party company in direct payment, and that the defendant did not remain at the time of receiving the notification of assignment from the non-party

B. It is insufficient to recognize the fact that Nonparty Company had a claim for the construction cost against the Defendant, which is subject to the assignment of claims by the Nonparty Company, solely with the descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statement Nos. 3 through 8, the Defendant shall pay the unpaid amount out of the construction amount, which was adjusted by the Nonparty Company, before the Nonparty Company transferred its claim to the Plaintiff.

arrow