beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Plaintiff
B The request for taking over the lawsuit by the applicant for taking over the lawsuit is dismissed.
Reasons
1. On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court, on the premise that an application for the adjustment of indirect costs arising from the extension of the construction period under a long-term continuing construction contract is not allowed, but an application for the adjustment of indirect costs arising from the extension of the construction period under a long-term continuing construction contract, on the grounds that the Plaintiffs’ application for the adjustment of the construction price in the instant case on December 26, 2012 constituted an application for the adjustment of indirect costs arising from the extension of the construction period under a large-term continuing construction contract (the first contract), and accepted the Plaintiffs’ application for the adjustment of indirect
Examining the records in accordance with the relevant legal principles, the lower court’s conclusion is justifiable to have determined that the Plaintiffs’ application for the adjustment of the construction cost of this case constitutes an application for indirect cost adjustment based on extension of construction period under the following contract (the first contract).
In doing so, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the alteration of lawsuits or the interpretation of expression of intent, thereby adversely affecting
2. According to the record as to a request for resumption of a lawsuit, the Plaintiff B filed a request for resumption of the lawsuit, claiming that “the applicant for resumption of the lawsuit succeeded to the rights and obligations related to the lawsuit by absorbing the Plaintiff B stock company, and comprehensively succeeding to the rights and obligations related to the lawsuit.”
However, in a case where a judgment is rendered without pleading at the same stage of the litigation proceedings of the Supreme Court without pleading, the applicant for a motion to resume the lawsuit is not allowed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Da206014, Mar. 26, 2020). 3. Accordingly, all appeals are dismissed, and the Plaintiff B’s request for a motion to resume the lawsuit is dismissed.