logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2015.04.10 2014가합423
공사대금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 60,424,960 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from June 12, 2014 to April 10, 2015.

Reasons

Basic Facts

A. On March 14, 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract for construction works (Evidence 3; hereinafter “the first contract for construction works in this case”) with 130,000,000 won with respect to the construction works for the construction of a double-generation on the land outside Chungcheongnam-gun, Hongsung-gun, and five parcels (hereinafter “EA”).

B. While the instant prime contract was concluded, the construction contract that the Defendant individually concluded was not able to receive (loan) funds to support the livestock pens facility modernization project (hereinafter “policy funds”), and the Defendant concluded a construction contract for the construction project (including the civil engineering project with D on March 29, 2013, with the presence of Hongsung-gun livestock and public officials, with the construction cost of KRW 1,133,840,000 (including value-added tax; hereinafter “instant prime contract”).

C. On April 2, 2013, D entered into the instant construction subcontract with the Plaintiff on April 2, 2013, entering into a contract with the Plaintiff to subcontract the construction cost of KRW 590,000,000 for the construction cost of the concrete sheet, steel structure, and board building among the instant construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction subcontract”).

The Plaintiff completed construction works under the instant construction subcontract on July 2013.

D Concluding the instant civil engineering subcontract, on April 14, 2013, subcontracted the portion of the instant civil engineering works among the instant nuclear construction contracts to KRW 90,000,00 (including value added tax) for the construction cost (Article 3; hereinafter referred to as “the instant civil construction subcontract,” and the Defendant’s series of construction works for the construction of the two generations.

In the letter of the contract agreement of this case, the phrase “the change of the construction axis and the business enterprise at the beginning of the beginning of 13,000,000,” “the entire order,” and “the changed content,” in the column “the place of origin.”

arrow