(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.09.18 2019나51038

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) 창원지방법원 2020.09.18 2019나51038

공사대금

Text

Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 92,188,803 against the Plaintiff and its related amount from September 29, 2016 to September 18, 2020.

Reasons

1. The grounds for this part of the reasoning are as follows: (a) the Defendant’s “land owned by the Plaintiff” in Section 10 of Section 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be deemed as “land owned by the Defendant”; and (b) the Defendant’s first action shall be deemed as “the Plaintiff” and the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the first action as “the Plaintiff”, and thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance

2. The grounds for this part of the allegations by the parties are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (Articles 3 through 4, 19). Thus, this part of the grounds are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Determination

A. We examine the judgment of the party to the contract for the instant construction project, since the plaintiff is not the party to the contract for the instant construction project, and thus, it is not possible to claim the construction cost.

In cases where an actor who enters into a contract performs a legal act in the name of another person, as to whom the actor or the title holder is the party to the contract, the actor or the title holder shall be determined as the party to the contract in accordance with the same intent if the intent of the actor and the other party is mutually agreed. If the other party does not coincide with each other, on the basis of the specific circumstances before and after the conclusion of the contract, such as the nature, content, purpose, and circumstances of the contract, if the other party is reasonable, it shall be determined as to whom the actor and the title holder in the contract should be the party to the contract, not always the party to the contract. This legal principle applies to a contractor who is not registered as a comprehensive constructor, while entering into a construction contract with a contractor, and the contractor entered into the contract with a registered contractor

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-대법원 2016.03.10 2015다240768

-광주고등법원 2018.10.05 2017나15149

-서울고등법원 2017.09.22 2017나2015568

-의정부지방법원 2015.08.13 2014가합55540

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.07 2015가합1609