beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1.Recognition
A. On March 8, 2013, the Defendant was awarded a contract for a new construction work B (hereinafter “instant construction work”) by the A unit, and was awarded a subcontract for Hydy Co., Ltd., and Hydy Co., Ltd re-subcontracted it to C (individual company operating the F).
B. On March 27, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a temporary re-lease agreement between C and C with a contract bond of KRW 10,000,000, and the lease period from March 28, 2013 to June 30, 2013 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).
[Judgment of the court below] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The Plaintiff asserted a direct payment agreement, based on the instant lease agreement, that the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff rent and the cost of loss incurred to the Plaintiff under the instant lease agreement, the lessee is obliged to pay the lessor the cost of loss incurred to the temporary property in cash. As the Plaintiff promised to pay the said cost directly, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid rent of KRW 23,003,016 and the cost of loss incurred to the temporary property 35,169,600.
The defendant paid 45,00,000 won to the plaintiff on October 14, 2013 and on the 22th of the same month, and around November of the same year, there is no dispute between the parties about the details of temporary materials transactions and the fact that the defendant demanded transmission, but there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that there was the promise of the plaintiff's assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
Rather, in light of the following circumstances, the Plaintiff requested a person in charge of A’s unit, who is the contractor, to suspend the payment of the work price to the Defendant until the due rent, etc. is settled, the Defendant would have to have no choice but to pay the work price to the Plaintiff in order to receive the payment of the work price from the contractor.