(영문) 전주지방법원 2017.11.01 2017나5986 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 전주지방법원 2017.11.01 2017나5986

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 parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant: (a) requested the Plaintiff to perform the interior works on the sixth floor of the building located in Seongdong-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant construction works”); (b) set the Plaintiff’s daily wage as KRW 2.50,000; (c) the Plaintiff completed the construction works; and (d) KRW 8,075,990 was required for the construction works.

However, the Defendant refused to pay 3.75 million won per 15 days per day that was promised to pay 8.15 million won to the Plaintiff (=15 days x 2.50 million won) and 4,150,000 won per day for 15 days to the Plaintiff.

After filing the instant lawsuit, KRW 521,260 was paid.

Therefore, 3,554,730 won (=4.150,000 won - 74,010 won (8.150,000 won - 8,075,90 won) - 521,260 won) such as daily allowances payable to the Defendant is sought.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant asserted that the instant construction works were specialized human resources recommended by the Plaintiff, and the construction cost shall be paid directly by the Defendant to the human resources in charge after the completion of each process. The money set as wages to the Plaintiff from the interior works of the instant case was KRW 2.5 million per day for four days during the removal work period.

The Defendant paid KRW 8,150,00 to the Plaintiff, and later, paid KRW 521,260,00 which was adjusted through settlement with the Plaintiff, after filing the instant lawsuit, and paid all the construction cost of the instant case.

In addition, the Plaintiff did not perform the repair of defects due to the interior works of this case and the Defendant spent KRW 13.2 million at the cost of the repair of defects. In light of this, there is no money to be paid to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

2. The fact that the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to perform the instant construction and completed the construction, and the fact that the Defendant agreed to give the Plaintiff KRW 250,000 per day does not conflict among the parties, but all the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff (including the materials submitted after the conclusion of the pleadings at the trial).

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2018.06.21 2017나9808

-부산지방법원 2019.10.15 2018가단305693

-전주지방법원 2017.07.05 2016가단21638

-수원지방법원 2018.05.17 2017나68998

-부산지방법원 2017.06.14 2016가합45567