logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.10.23 2014가합3766
유치권부존재확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's motion to intervene in the principal lawsuit of this case and the independent party intervenor shall be dismissed in all.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The company that conducts real estate development business, etc. and the defendant limited liability company A (hereinafter “Defendant A”) are companies that conduct automobile sales business, etc. and the defendant limited liability company B (hereinafter “Defendant B”) are companies that conduct mine extraction business, etc.

B. On December 15, 2009, the Plaintiff and the Seoul Seo-gu Construction Co., Ltd. jointly conducted an urban development project for the D Motor Vehicle Trading Complex (hereinafter “instant urban development project”) with authorization for an urban development project implementation plan by expropriation or use in accordance with the Urban Development Act with respect to the land of this case, Seo-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which includes each of the instant land, from the head of the Gu-gu, Seo-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant project site”).

C. On December 24, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with AD General Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “AD Construction”) for the construction of the instant site for the instant project (hereinafter “the instant civil works”) by setting forth KRW 1,215,50,000 as the construction cost as KRW 1,215,50,000 with respect to the instant site for the project (hereinafter “instant civil works”).

On October 10, 2011, construction entered into a subcontract (hereinafter “instant subcontract”) with a construction company (hereinafter “construction”), with respect to the instant civil engineering works, with a fixed period of KRW 1.98 million from October 10, 201 to December 31, 201 (the construction period of December 21, 201 changes from March 30, 201 to March 30, 201). “E”, the representative director of the Defendants, had a joint and several surety obligation under the instant subcontract in the name of an individual.

E. On December 12, 2011, the Plaintiff took out earth, sand, and rock from the instant site to Defendant A, and completed a flat work and parking lot. The Plaintiff did not participate in the Defendant A’s soil, sand, and rock collection work, but the Plaintiff bears the burden of cost necessary for the earth, sand, and rock collection work.

arrow