logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.02.10 2015가합57474
공사대금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 107,423,356 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from January 28, 2016 to February 10, 2017.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 28, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a standard subcontract for construction works with respect to reinforced concrete construction works (hereinafter “instant construction works”) among the new construction works for the main apartment complex “B” on the ground A, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which the Defendant contracted as a contractor.

The principal contractor under the instant construction contract: The Plaintiff’s subcontractor’s construction period: November 28, 2014 / the contract amount on June 15, 2015: 676,572,000 won (the supply price of KRW 650,000,000, value added tax amount of KRW 26,572,00):

(a) No advance payment;

(b)Payment once a month of completed portion and 90% of the completed amount (payment in cash on the 15th of the following month, after a request was made by 30 days after the end of each month);

(c) Balance: The rate of penalty for delay paid in cash within 60 days after completion: 0.1%; and

B. The instant construction project was completed around August 8, 2015, and the unpaid construction balance out of the amount of the said construction contract is deemed not to dispute the amount of the unpaid construction payment itself.

On the other hand, the Defendant, on the other hand, deducted the amount equivalent to the above material cost from the claim amount, as the Plaintiff stated in the application for modification of the purport of claim and the cause of claim as of January 26, 2016, as necessary for the instant construction project and the cost of materials from the cost of claim.

A direct disbursement was made.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 4, part of witness C's testimony, fact-finding to the Gwanak-gu Office of this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the above facts, barring special circumstances, the Defendant’s remaining construction cost of KRW 176,880,294, which was not paid to the Plaintiff that completed the instant construction project, was 172,630,794 as well as 60 days after the completion date of construction, which was the date following the date of delivery of a copy of the application for modification of the purport of the instant claim and the cause of the claim, as sought by the Plaintiff, as requested by the Plaintiff.

arrow