logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.06.05 2018가단2756
공사대금 등
Text

1. Defendant B and C jointly and severally with the Plaintiff 70,400,000 and the Defendant B Co., Ltd. with respect thereto on March 15, 2017.

Reasons

1. Determination as to claims against Defendant B and C

A. Around January 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction works with Defendant B, Shin-dong, Chungcheongnam-dong, and Lestop, with Defendant B, but the construction was suspended due to Defendant B’s failure to pay the down payment and the progress payment.

Defendant C prepared a note of payment on February 27, 2017 by March 14, 2017, with the payment of the construction cost of KRW 70,40,000,000,000, but has not yet been paid.

Therefore, Defendant B is a contractor for construction work, and Defendant C is jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 70,40,000 and the damages for delay calculated by each of the rates of 15% per annum under the Commercial Act from March 15, 2017 following the due date until the date of delivery of a duplicate of the complaint to the Defendants (Defendant B: March 29, 2018; Defendant C: February 12, 2018).

B. Based on Defendant B: A judgment by public notice (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act) (Article 208(3) of the Civil Procedure Act): Defendant C is liable to pay the money stated in the purport of the claim jointly with Defendant B and C, because the judgment by public notice was rendered by confession (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act and Defendant C did not submit a written reply and did not appear on the date of pleading).

However, the evidence No. 6 (Incompetence) cannot be used as evidence because the seal affixed by Defendant D’s name differs from the seal affixed by Defendant D’s name under the Defendant D’s certificate No. 7 (Certificate of Seal Imprint), and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the authenticity, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the fact of joint and several surety by Defendant D. Thus, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's conclusion

arrow