(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.07.10 2014나18770

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) 수원지방법원 2015.07.10 2014나18770

부당이득금반환 및 가설재인도

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant was awarded a subcontract for some of the construction works of the Do government office in the Do government office and the Council building located in Ansan-si, Chungcheongnam-do (hereinafter “instant construction works”) from a consortium, such as Daewoo Construction Co., Ltd.

B. Upon A’s request, the Plaintiff supplied temporary materials at the instant construction site around November 2012 to a company that engages in building temporary materials leasing business.

C. There is no temporary property lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 5 and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff rent of KRW 21,558,500 from November 7, 2012 to December 31, 2013, and the amount of the unpaid temporary material value of KRW 29,700, the sum of KRW 51,258,500, and the delay damages for the lease of the temporary material at the instant construction site upon receiving the Defendant’s request for the delivery of the temporary material from the Defendant’s site A, a person in charge of the Defendant’s material.

The evidence evidence Nos. 2 and 6 can not be found to have been entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant solely with respect to the documents of evidence Nos. 2 and 6, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it (no evidence exists to recognize that A and B are the Defendant’s employees). The Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.

B. The Plaintiff’s judgment as to the assertion of expression representation is based on the following: (a) the site of this case is subject to strict control of internal entry and the outside person was unable to enter; (b) the Plaintiff sent an order issued under the name of the Defendant; (c) two containers, which are temporary objects, were installed as the Defendant’s temporary office in the construction site of this case; and (d) A and B were stationed in the outer wall; and (e) they were stationed in the construction site of this case at the time of delivery. In full view of the above, A and B have the power to conclude

유사 판례

-광주고등법원(전주) 2017.11.16 2016나566

-대전지방법원 2014.10.30 2014가합101068

-수원지방법원 2016.09.08 2015나43339

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2015.08.26 2015가단621

-수원지방법원성남지원 2014.04.24 2013가단23111