logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2016.11.29 2016가단201851
부분 목적물 수령 확인의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From November 8, 2011, the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for construction work with respect to a temporary installation work and reinforced concrete construction work among the construction work of a new site neighborhood living facility and an officetel in Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon, for a construction period from November 8, 201 to December 31, 201, and construction work price of KRW 2,516,800,000.

B. Defendant (Appointed Party) and Appointed D (hereinafter “Appointed Party”) were the employees of Defendant (Appointed Party) and Defendant D, including Defendant (Appointed Party and Appointed Party D) and the head of the said construction site office.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's claim of this case is mainly two reasons for the plaintiff's claim against the designated parties. ① First, as the plaintiff was promised to be liable for the equipment costs from the designated parties during the execution of construction works under the subcontract with the above B, the plaintiff is obligated to pay the sum of KRW 22,216,00,000 for the equipment costs incurred therefrom and the amount of KRW 22,150,000 for the driver's operating fees and delay damages incurred therefrom, and ② even if there was no such promise, the designated parties at the site director recognized the nature of the plaintiff and sent them to B when the plaintiff claimed for additional or modified construction costs, and thus the plaintiff did not recognize the plaintiff's flag and caused damages for which the plaintiff could not receive the equipment costs corresponding to the nature of the plaintiff's flag.

3. Determination

A. First, we examine the Plaintiff’s assertion that the designated parties promised to pay the construction cost.

The Plaintiff submitted E/F’s statement (Evidence A No. 11-2) to the effect that the designated parties agreed to provide the above payment to prove it, but such statement is nothing more than the evidence that is not supported by other evidence.

arrow