logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.10 2016가단5204755
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 26,818,00 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from August 9, 2016 to January 10, 2018, and the following.

Reasons

Basic Facts

On September 16, 2015, the Defendant concluded a contract for construction works contracted between September 30, 2015 and March 20, 2016, with the construction cost for the extension and reconstruction works of the dominium from the dominium meeting (including VT) and the construction period fixed from September 30, 2015 to March 20, 2016.

On October 30, 2015, the Defendant entered into a subcontract for construction works with the construction cost of KRW 638,000,000 (including VAT) and the construction period fixed from October 30 to March 20, 2016 to October 30, 2015.

On November 12, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to change the supply and installation work of GHP (Glas Heat Pum), which is a freezing machine, to the construction cost of KRW 135,000,000 (VAT separate) and to the construction period of November 12, 2015 to April 10, 2016, but entered into a contract to increase the construction cost of April 8, 2016 to KRW 14,450,00 (VT separate).

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant construction”). The instant construction works were performed, and on April 24, 2016, abandoned the remaining construction works, and completed a written agreement on the waiver of the remaining construction works with the Defendant, the contractor, and suspended the construction works.

Plaintiff

In addition, on May 4, 2016, the Defendant and A agreed to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 110,20,000 (including VAT separate, 121,220,000 if included) out of KRW 144,450,00 (VAT separate, and VAT separate) of the construction cost of the instant construction project to be paid to the Plaintiff in this issue, and the remainder of KRW 34,250,00 (VAT separate) to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant direct payment agreement”). A decision on provisional seizure of claims against the Defendant on this issue has reached the Defendant, as described in the following table:

The defendant joining the defendant is the defendant joining the dry field construction company, which has a case number of 1st of the provisional seizure date.

May 2, 2016, Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2016Kadan13212, Jul. 22, 2016, Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2016Dadan13212, Jul. 22, 2016.

arrow