beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant concluded a contract with C Apartment in 2015, Daju, Da, Daejeon Music Institute’s Electric Construction, and the Construction Work for the Construction Work for the Construction Work for the Construction Work for the Construction Work for the Construction Work for the Construction Work for the Construction Work for the Construction Work for the Construction Work for the Construction Work for the Construction Work for the Construction Work.
However, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 79,635,00 won for the construction cost, etc. (C Apartment Electrical Construction KRW 4,500,000 for the delay damages of KRW 15% for the delay damages of KRW 3,800,00 for the delay damages of KRW 15% for the delay damages of KRW 12,140,000 for the delay damages of KRW 15% for the delay damages of KRW 1,140,00 for the delay damages of KRW 12,00 for the delay damages of KRW 15% for the delay damages of KRW 3,60,000 for the delay damages of KRW 3,60,00 for the damage damages of KRW 11,00,00 for the delay damages of KRW 11,00,00 for the installation works, KRW 9,00 for the delay damages of KRW 10,00,00 for the additional communication work, KRW 00,000 for the delay damages of 0 for the delay damages.
2. In addition to the statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the fact that the defendant participated in the construction works of this case and the payment of the construction cost thereof can be acknowledged. However, each of the above evidence alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant contracted each of the construction works of this case to the plaintiff as a contracting party, and there is no other evidence to
Rather, in full view of each of the evidence mentioned above and the evidence stated in Eul Nos. 4 through 6, the plaintiff can be acknowledged that the plaintiff contracted each of the instant construction works from the Sod Design Co., Ltd. and claimed construction price for the above company. The defendant is directly the F of the above company, and is only involved in the progress of the above construction and the settlement of part of the construction cost.
Therefore, as a party to the contract, the Defendant’s respective construction works as the Plaintiff.