logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.07.08 2016나20
건설장비임대료
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 27, 2010, the Defendant was awarded a subcontract for the part of the E civil engineering works among the E works undertaken in Seocho-gu Seoul, C, and Jung-gu Seoul, Seoul.

B. G operating “F” has been put into the construction site of the Defendant from February 2, 2014.

G has issued a tax invoice with the Defendant as a person to whom the Defendant is supplied, and has received construction machinery rent from the Defendant.

C. The Plaintiff is running construction machinery rental business under the trade name of “H”.

G around May 18, 2014, upon receiving a request from the defendant for the operation of a sculf at the above construction site, G was placed into another construction site, and the sculf was introduced to the plaintiff.

On May 19, 2014, the Plaintiff invested one digging machine (I) at the above construction site of the Defendant.

The plaintiff completed work with the direction of the field manager, and the defendant was signed by the field manager in the standard contract for the lease of construction machinery entered as the lessee.

The plaintiff's above flag rent is KRW 500,000 per day.

E. Around January 2015, G’s employees visited the Defendant’s head office, and the Defendant’s employees decided to pay the construction equipment rent on May 2014 and June 2014.

G received an order to pay the rent for the unpaid construction equipment against the defendant later, and the plaintiff's above sofacing rental fee is not included in the above payment order.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, testimony by J of the first instance trial witness, purport of whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. According to the fact of recognition of the above obligation to pay rent, the Defendant agreed to rent the Plaintiff’s digging machine through F to have the Plaintiff work on the construction site and pay the equipment rent.

The Defendant’s aforementioned rent of KRW 500,000 and the following day after the delivery of a duplicate of the complaint of this case to the Plaintiff shall be from May 5, 2015 to the promotion of litigation, etc.

arrow