logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.10.04 2017가합57320
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) from July 16, 2017 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) Co., Ltd. 88,749,966 won and its related amount.

Reasons

This paper examines the counterclaims together.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 2016, the Plaintiff, a company engaged in manufacturing and distributing rice, i.e., peeped rice (i., peeped rice) and Chinese medicine, is the Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”).

2) The Plaintiff’s existing manufacturing plant extension work and remodeling work for the total manufacturing factory extended (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant construction work”).

(2) On December 13, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant B, setting the deadline for completion as KRW 342,643,400 for the instant extended construction works, as of February 28, 2017 (hereinafter “instant first contract”). As to the electrical construction, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with KRW 11,581,90 for the said construction works (hereinafter “instant contract for electrical construction”). As to the construction works, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant B by setting the contract amount as KRW 18,338,100 for the construction cost (hereinafter “instant contract for electrical construction”).

The rate of liquidated damages for each of the above contracts is 0.1%, and the defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant C") jointly and severally guaranteed the obligations of the defendant B under the above contract.

[This case’s electrical construction contract is signed by the contractor as Defendant B’s subcontractor. D (hereinafter “D”).

The contract for fire-fighting construction of this case is written as E by the contractor, who is the subcontractor of the defendant B, but the contractor of the above contract also is the defendant B, there is no dispute between the parties.

Plaintiff’s Claim No. 2

A. (1) Paragraph (b) and Paragraph (1) which causes a counterclaim of Defendant B’s counterclaim, the Plaintiff and the Defendants asserted the same amount of KRW 940,000,000 as the total construction cost under the contract between the Plaintiff and Defendant B. The said KRW 940,000,000 is the instant electrical construction contract and the fire fighting work.

arrow