logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2020.08.20 2019나5867
공사대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

[Claim]

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to contract the said construction work with respect to “C New Construction Relocation Works” (hereinafter “instant construction work”) on September 5, 2016, the date of commencement, December 15, 2016, the date of completion, and the total construction cost of KRW 700 million (including surtax).

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

While the Plaintiff was performing construction work under the instant contract, on December 1, 2016, the Plaintiff suspended construction work on or before December 1, 2016. On December 13, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content that “The Defendant had no intent to maintain the instant contract, such as directly paying the material price to the supplier, even though there was no direct payment agreement with the Plaintiff,” and then cancelled the instant contract, and KRW 170,559,880 (=i.e., the cost of the construction work 312,00,000 (i.e., the cost of the construction work - KRW 141,440,120) was paid by December 20, 2016.” The said certificate of content was served to the Defendant around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant contract constitutes a contract agreement, and as long as the construction work under the instant contract was not completed and has been lawfully rescinded, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 142,196,345, which remains after deducting the Defendant’s already paid as construction cost, etc. from KRW 311,893,165 up to that time, and the construction cost, etc. was paid to the Plaintiff.

B. In a case where a contractor of the relevant legal doctrine has to settle construction costs due to the rescission of the construction contract without completion of the construction work, the construction cost should be calculated by applying the agreed construction cost ratio of the amount calculated based on the nature and the amount of the construction cost to be entered or entered into the non-construction part, and the construction cost should be calculated.

This ratio has already been completed as of the time when the contractor’s obligation to pay the construction cost has occurred, that is, at the time of suspending the construction work.

arrow