logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.10.10 2013가합9978
하자보수공사비 등
Text

1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 331,550,651 to each of the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and its related amount from July 25, 2013 to July 25, 2014.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 5, 2011, the Plaintiffs concluded a construction contract with the Defendant, who lent the name of Samsung Co., Ltd., setting the construction work for the 7th floor neighborhood living facilities on the D ground in Seongdong-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant construction work”) at KRW 3.8 million per the average cost of construction (excluding value-added tax) and setting the construction contract for the construction work under the contract cycle to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant construction contract”). As a special agreement, the Plaintiffs agreed to the following terms and conditions:

All of the public charges for additional construction works, other than the drawings, shall be borne by the plaintiffs.

For example, electricity, water supply, city house planning, construction design, authorization cost increased shall be calculated on a regular basis. To example), pent towers, beeas, underground.

B. After additionally purchasing the above E land on June 28, 2012, the Plaintiffs decided to newly construct the instant building on each ground of the said D and E (a building area of 1190.99 square meters, approximately 360 square meters), and determined the construction cost as KRW 1.368 million (=3.8 million x 3.60 square meters, separate value-added tax).

C. The Plaintiffs paid each of the construction price under the instant construction contract to the Defendant KRW 20 million on September 3, 2012, and KRW 300 million on October 1, 2012.

Around August 2012, the Defendant commenced the instant construction work and suspended the instant construction work on or around January 1, 2013. On January 18, 2013, the Plaintiffs entered into a construction contract with the Defendant’s introduction, providing that: (a) the Plaintiff would implement the remainder of the construction work during the instant construction work (the amount excluding KRW 868,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000).

E. However, Article 14(1) of the Act provides that “The Defendant and his/her assistant may cancel the contract for construction work” on May 27, 2013 and that “the Defendant and his/her assistant may cancel the contract for construction work” and “the Defendant and his/her assistant may receive the contract for construction work.”

arrow