logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
수원지방법원안산지원 2015.08.26 2014가단109532
공탁금출급청구권확인
Text

1. Thai Construction Co., Ltd., on October 26, 2010, deposited by the Seoul Eastern District Court No. 3799, the amount of KRW 75,900,453.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant STT Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant STT Construction”) received “TK construction” from Tae Young Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “TTT Construction”) for “TK construction in order to ensure that the CTTT Construction Co., Ltd. received the “TK construction in order to ensure that the CTTT Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “TTT Construction”).

By October 26, 2010, Tae Young Construction did not pay KRW 75,900,453 (hereinafter “the remainder of this case”) out of the construction cost to Defendant Stran by October 26, 2010.

B. Defendant 1’s transfer, etc. of the right to claim 0.2 to the Plaintiff and some Defendants, as indicated below, and the assignment of the right to claim 20.2 of the right to claim 10,00,000 No. 20,000,000,000 to the Plaintiff on September 22, 2010, 200, the transferee of the right to claim 200,000,000,000,000 on September 3, 2010, the transferee of the right to claim 10,000,000,000,000 on September 4, 2010, the transferee of the right to claim 10,000,000, 000, 74,260,000, 000, 000 or 10,000,00 or less, on September 35, 2010

However, Tae Young Construction did not pay the subcontract price directly because it did not meet the requirements for direct payment of the subcontract price.

3. The Plaintiff’s claim for construction price is not a “goods payment claim” but a “construction price claim” against Tae Young Construction.

arrow