logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원(인천) 2020.11.12 2019나14606
공사대금
Text

All appeals filed by the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) and the claims filed by this court as the main claim are dismissed.

2...

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, if the court excludes the parts to be used or added as described in the following paragraph (2), and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts used or added;

A. On the 5th day of the first instance judgment, the 12th day of the same month is “13. of the same month”; the 5th day of the 5th day “out-of-school” in the 13th day of the same month; the 8th day “out-of-school” in the 13th day of the 13th day of the same month; the 8th day “out-of-school” in the 8th day is “taking over-out”; the 8th day “each entry” in the 10th day of the 8th page 10 and 11 as “each entry and video”; and the 8th day of the 12th day of the 8th instance judgment as “the first instance court” in the 10th day of the 16th day of the first instance judgment; the 500,000,000 won [the Plaintiff] calculated the amount of construction work price of 95,395 million won,000,0000 won + the additional construction work price of 361,781.5 million won [1.

C. On No. 11 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the “entry” in the No. 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be written “each entry”.

On the 21st page of the first instance judgment, the following shall be added.

In addition, the plaintiff actually constitutes E company, and the plaintiff entered into the contract of this case with the knowledge of 1.3 billion won of the construction price without knowing the agreement on the rebates between E and F. The plaintiff asserts to the effect that the contract of this case should be calculated on the basis of KRW 1.3 billion of the construction price, since the agreement to pay KRW 100 million of the above construction price as rebates is an embezzlement against the plaintiff, the contract of this case shall be calculated on the basis of KRW 1.3 billion.

In this case, the contract of this case is concluded.

arrow