logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.11.30 2016나3397
공사대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. From November 5, 2013 to December 10, 2013, the Plaintiff made an oral contract with the Defendant, who is the actual representative director of the instant company, to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost, and completed the construction work. Since the Defendant paid the construction cost of November 1, 2013 to KRW 17,774,30, the construction cost of December 17, 2013 to the Plaintiff, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total of KRW 19,431,590 (i.e., the total of the construction cost of the Plaintiff’s unpaid payment to the Plaintiff (i.e., November 1, 2013, KRW 657,290, and KRW 17,774,590).

B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Defendant was an employee of the instant company at the time of the instant construction work, and there was no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff to conclude a construction contract or to pay the construction cost as alleged by the Plaintiff. Nonparty H, who is an employee of the instant company, concluded a construction contract for the instant construction work

2. First of all, it is not sufficient to acknowledge that Nonparty I concluded a construction contract with the Plaintiff on behalf of the Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff as to whether Nonparty I signed the construction contract on behalf of the Plaintiff with the content of the Plaintiff, and the testimony of Nonparty I at the trial witness J alone is insufficient to recognize that Nonparty I signed the construction contract with the Plaintiff on behalf of the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Rather, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the evidence and evidence No. 1 (the same as evidence No. 3-2), evidence No. 3, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 3, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 3-1, 2, Eul No. 4-5, and evidence No. 7, and the whole purport of argument No. 7, are as follows:

arrow