logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.11.17 2015가합54563
손해배상(기)
Text

1. As to KRW 43,713,747 among the Plaintiff and KRW 30,00,000 among them, the Defendant shall: (a) from March 9, 2013 to January 14, 2015; and (b) 13.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a corporation established for the purpose of civil engineering work business, etc., and the defendant is the representative director of the B farming association corporation (hereinafter "agricultural corporation").

B. The farming corporation entering into a contract between the Plaintiff and the farming corporation intended to newly construct a foul waste treatment plant in Naju City, and there was a need for restoration of forests and fields related to the said land (hereinafter “ restoration work”) to be done prior to the said new construction.

Accordingly, around September 2010, D, the Defendant’s spouse and farming corporations, proposed that the Plaintiff be entrusted with civil engineering and construction works among the entire construction works of excreta treatment plants (hereinafter “civil engineering and construction works of excreta treatment plants”), and that the Plaintiff consented thereto.

C. On the other hand, while the Plaintiff’s contract for the housing construction was entered into, the E and three parcels (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the Defendant, there were 11 houses, which are the buildings not completed, owned by the Defendant. However, D proposed the Plaintiff that the said 11 unit completion works and the two unit construction works of the assembly-type building (hereinafter “family construction”). The Plaintiff consented thereto (hereinafter “instant contract”), and the written contract for the housing construction without preparing the written contract for the housing construction (hereinafter “the instant contract”), but the Plaintiff agreed to settle the actual cost incurred by the Plaintiff orally.

The Plaintiff’s claim for construction cost and the grace period for repayment agreed upon on June 201, the Plaintiff claimed D for restoration work and housing construction cost, but did not receive it. D paid all construction cost to the Plaintiff when the construction of excreta treatment plant is completed after completion of the entire construction of the excreta treatment plant. The Plaintiff accepted this.

E. The entire construction of foul waste treatment plants promoted by a farming corporation upon completion of a foul waste treatment plant was completed around February 2013, and the foul waste treatment plant was completed on March 8, 2013.

arrow