logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.10.26 2016가합48689
보증채무금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Basic Facts

A. The plaintiff is a legal entity that runs a construction business, and the defendant is a partnership established pursuant to the Framework Act on the Construction Industry for the purpose of various guarantees and loans necessary for the construction business operation of its members.

B. On June 26, 2015, the Plaintiff et al. entered into a construction contract with Busan Metropolitan City on June 26, 2015 with respect to construction works for the ecological experience center in the Hansan Park that was ordered by Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant construction works”).

C. On October 12, 2015, the Plaintiff and the construction period from October 13, 2015 to May 31, 2016, entered into a subcontract agreement of KRW 1,155,00,000 (including additional tax) with respect to the instant sub-contractor construction project, which is a member of the Defendant (hereinafter “self-U.S. construction”), and filed an application for advance payment guarantee in relation to the instant subcontract with relevant documents, including a subcontract agreement.

Accordingly, the Defendant entered into a contract of guarantee of advance payment (hereinafter “instant contract of guarantee of advance payment”) between October 20, 2015 and J.S. Construction, and the guarantee period from October 20, 2015 to May 31, 2016, and issued a certificate of guarantee of advance payment.

The plaintiff delivered this to the plaintiff, and on November 2, 2015, the plaintiff paid advance of KRW 297,000,000 to the self-help Construction.

E. Meanwhile, a self-construction failed to carry out construction under the instant subcontract agreement at the time when the contract was concluded. On May 3, 2016, the Plaintiff requested the self-U.S. Construction to take several measures to meet the construction plan and air time, but there was no answer, and thus, notified the termination of the instant subcontract agreement, deeming that the self-U.S. construction did not intend to carry out construction.

The plaintiff against the defendant under the contract of guarantee of the advance payment of this case.

arrow