logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2014.01.10 2013가합1511
추심금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 106,512,482 and the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from May 1, 2013 to the date of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Dispute 1 between the parties surrounding the installation of Category C stone 1) The price for stone Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “inbound company”)

Around December 31, 2005, the Foundation C contracted to install stone (referring to one unit of stone, such as gret stone, floor stone, bret stone, bret stone, ground stone, rock bret stone, and fireworks disease) operated by the said Foundation C from the said Foundation C, and the Plaintiff subcontracted a part of the said installation work to the Plaintiff on the same day. On June 9, 2006, the Plaintiff was awarded a sub-subcontracting a part of the subcontracted installation work to the Defendant, and the contract date was retroactively written on December 31, 2005.2) After which the dispute arose between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on whether the said subcontract was executed and terminated, and the Defendant re-subcontracted the said subcontracted construction work from around August 17, 2006 to the Plaintiff’s use of violence to the Plaintiff, and re-subcontracted the said subcontracted construction work to the Plaintiff on the same day and at around 27, 2006.

3) The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s representative director D would pay KRW 480 million to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s representative director D, and filed a lawsuit claiming for the price of goods, etc. under the Goyang-gu District Court 2006Gahap6478. However, upon accepting the claim on October 5, 2007 only the cost of KRW 42 million out of the claimed amount on October 5, 2007, the Defendant obstructed the Plaintiff’s construction of stone by means of using the aforementioned judgment as good, mobilization of violence on November 14, 2007, and driving away the Plaintiff’s work employees at the workplace. (B) Nor later than April 2, 2008, when the dispute was pending as above, the Plaintiff and the Nonparty Company, upon recommendation of the president of the Incorporated Foundation C E, divided the Plaintiff into KRW 50%, the Plaintiff 25%, the Defendant divided the construction work into water, and received and carried out work as agreed.”

arrow