logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.04.12 2017나870
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 Plaintiff’s assertion on October 2015: (a) around December 2015, the Plaintiff completed the painting and waterproof Construction Work for C employees apartment in Daegu Suwon-gu, Daegu-gu, which was supplied by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant Construction Work”); and (b) paid KRW 49,401,00 as the construction cost; and (c) the construction cost received from the Defendant is merely KRW 41,60,000,000; and (d) the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the balance of the construction cost and delay damages.

2. In light of the following circumstances, the Plaintiff appears to have received all the construction cost under the instant construction contract from the Defendant. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s claim seeking the payment of unpaid construction cost is without merit.

The contract amount of the construction of this case was increased to KRW 28,600,000, and the changed contract amount was changed to KRW 41,800,00,000, shall be recognized by the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, either there is no dispute between the parties or by the parties.

Therefore, the Defendant should pay the Plaintiff KRW 41,800,000, which is the construction cost under the contract.

It is not sufficient to prove whether the actual construction cost actually paid by the Plaintiff for the instant construction project exceeds KRW 49,401,00, and even if so, there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff is liable to pay the Defendant money exceeding the contract price.

B. On March 22, 2016, after the completion of the instant construction project, the Plaintiff confirmed that the Defendant received the construction cost (including all additional construction cost) from the Defendant. As of this date, the Plaintiff promised that the Defendant did not have any obligation to pay the subsequent construction cost. Recognizing that there is no objection to the settlement and receipt of the agreed construction cost. The Plaintiff agreed that no objection is raised to the settlement and receipt of the agreed construction cost. As to the instant construction work, civil and criminal liability, such as defect performance liability, should be confirmed to the Plaintiff. As to the instant construction work, the Plaintiff prepared and delivered a “certificate of performance of defects and receipt of the construction cost (Evidence No. 2)” to the Defendant, and written out therein.

arrow