(영문) 광주지방법원목포지원 2015.01.14 2014가단7979

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주지방법원목포지원 2015.01.14 2014가단7979

청구이의

Text

1. The Defendant’s payment order for the Defendant’s claim for service costs (No. 2013j2582) against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 9, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Sungsung Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Salization Development”) under which the Plaintiff concluded a contract with the Plaintiff to accept the instant construction of reinforced concrete (hereinafter “instant construction”) as the construction cost of KRW 428,00,000 and the construction period from November 22, 2012 to May 13, 2013 (the extension to November 28, 2013 thereafter).

(hereinafter “instant subcontract”). (b)

The Defendant asserted that, upon the Plaintiff’s request, dispatched the seal to the instant construction site from April 1, 2013 to June 30, 2013 for the instant construction project, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order seeking payment of KRW 5,226,00, out of the unpaid amount of KRW 24,154,450 in total, such as the seal dispatch fees, etc. during the instant period, from April 1, 2013 to June 30, 2013, the payment order became final and conclusive around that time by issuing a payment order on November 29, 2013.

(hereinafter “instant payment order”). 【The fact that there is no dispute over part of the grounds for recognition, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 12, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that, inasmuch as the Plaintiff did not enter into a direct labor supply contract with the Defendant, it is not proper for the Plaintiff to re-subcontract the construction of the mold part of the instant construction to C, who was supplied human resources by the Defendant, etc. under his responsibility and performed the construction of the mold part of the instant construction, compulsory execution based on the instant payment order should be denied, under the premise that the Plaintiff was liable for payment of the royalties amounting to KRW 5,226,00,000.

As to this, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff et al. supplied the human resources of this case to the defendant at the construction site, the plaintiff directly related to the above labor supply contract is obligated to pay the remaining human dispatch fee to the defendant.

(b)in the case of a final and conclusive order of payment, that is.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2018.07.20 2017나13048

-대구지방법원 2017.09.20 2017나304442

-부산고등법원(창원) 2019.04.03 2018누10401

-창원지방법원진주지원 2017.04.18 2016가단2198

-대구지방법원 2017.09.21 2016나10917