(영문) 제주지방법원 2015.04.21 2014가단16325

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 제주지방법원 2015.04.21 2014가단16325

공사대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant, the owner of the building, completed the Changho Construction Work among the 2 and 3th extension works in Jeju-si Housing Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant construction work”). The Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for payment of KRW 29.1 million for the cost of Changho Construction and the damages for delay.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the statements and arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including each number), the Defendant: (a) contracted all of the instant construction works to D on September 2, 2013; (b) changed the contractor on November 10, 2013; and (c) subcontracted the instant construction works to the Plaintiff during the instant construction works; (c) the Plaintiff prepared and submitted a estimate for the creative construction works on February 11, 2014; and (d) the Plaintiff directly received KRW 15 million from the Defendant, the owner of the building on April 11, 2014, who was the completion of the construction works, who was the owner of the building on April 11, 2014, and received the subcontract from the Defendant, but the Defendant received KRW 15 million out of the construction costs directly from the Defendant; and (c) the Plaintiff can only be recognized as having received a receipt from the Defendant, barring any special circumstances.

The Plaintiff entered into a contract directly with the Defendant for the Chang Ho Construction Work.

Although the defendant alleged that he/she made a verbal agreement to pay the price for the creative construction work directly to the plaintiff, it is difficult to believe that the statement on the evidence No. 4 and the statement on the remaining evidence No. 2 submitted by the plaintiff is sufficient to conclude that the defendant agreed to pay the price for the creative construction work directly to the plaintiff exceeding the above 15 million won, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the plaintiff's assertion otherwise.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2020.10.22 2019나14646

-부산지방법원 2019.03.22 2018나50789

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2015.08.25 2014가단7809

-부산지방법원 2015.02.12 2014나45406

-창원지방법원 2018.08.08 2018가단1585