logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.02.22 2016나54961
공사대금
Text

1. The first instance judgment, including the principal claim expanded by this court and the counterclaim claim filed by this court.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 11, 2014, the Plaintiff concluded the first contract with the Defendant with regard to the construction cost of KRW 275,000,000 and the construction period of KRW 300,00 with regard to the instant construction work (hereinafter “instant construction work”). B. The Plaintiff, on June 16, 2014, remitted the instant construction cost of KRW 0,000,000,000, KRW 00,000, KRW 10,000, KRW 200,000, KRW 30,000, KRW 15,000, KRW 20,000, KRW 30,000, KRW 40,000, KRW 15,000, KRW 10,000, KRW 30,000, KRW 48,50,000, KRW 10,000, KRW 30,50,000.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant construction cost is KRW 275,00,00 according to the first contract. However, the Plaintiff paid KRW 220,00,00 to the Defendant as the instant construction cost from June 16, 2014 to August 5, 2014, and paid KRW 131,848,204 to the subcontractor. Accordingly, the amount paid by the Plaintiff in relation to the instant construction work is KRW 351,848,204. Therefore, the Defendant return KRW 76,848,204 to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.2) The Defendant prepared a written estimate for construction work, which is close to the sum paid directly from the money received by the Plaintiff, and issued it according to the construction tax invoice.

In addition, when the plaintiff seeks to report including the above matters from the defendant, the above 350,000,000 won.

arrow