logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.10.17 2016가단300861
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall:

A. Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) Company A, 22,930,000 won, and Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) Co., Ltd.

Reasons

The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed to have been filed.

1. Basic facts

A. The relationship 1 between the Plaintiff and the Defendants is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff newly constructed four Do-Ba (B-dong, B-dong, B-dong, Si-dong, and D-dong) on the ground of the window C, etc. of Changwon-si, which is multi-household housing; and (b) E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter

(2) The construction of the instant construction project (hereinafter referred to as the “instant construction project”) under the name of the Corporation.

2) The Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A”) completed the instant construction work by being awarded a contract with the Twit and Twit (hereinafter “instant Twit and Twit”) among the instant construction works, and the Defendant Han Young-gu Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Han-gu Construction”) among the instant construction works (hereinafter “Defendant Han-gu Construction”); and Defendant B completed the instant construction work by entering into a contract with the Twit-ho, Twit, and Free Construction (hereinafter “instant Chang-gu Construction”).

B. On July 15, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant A to enter into a contract with the Plaintiff on the terms of KRW 95,80,000,000 for the instant Tym and Tym (Tym). (2) Defendant A received the payment of KRW 46,50,000,000,000 as the construction cost on July 29, 2015, KRW 30,000,000 as the construction cost, KRW 6.5 million on September 11, 2015, and KRW 6.5 million on September 25, 2015.

3) Defendant A did not perform the work equivalent to KRW 13,650,000. In addition, Defendant A did not perform the toilet floor construction with a general square day and plastic, not a stone, and did not perform the construction to put theme in the outside of each building. The repair cost for the alteration of the toilet floor was KRW 7,20,000,000, and the repair cost for the alteration of the toilet floor to the outside of each building is KRW 12,720,000,000,000,000. (C) around July 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant Han-do Construction and the instant painting Construction and the external heat reduction work with the construction cost of KRW 96,600,000,000.

2 Defendant Han-si Construction.

arrow