(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.03.20 2013가단49726

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) 서울동부지방법원 2014.03.20 2013가단49726

공사대금 등

Text

1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 49,200,000 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from September 26, 2013 to March 20, 2014.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a construction business entity that reconstructed the Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C lending (hereinafter “the instant lending”), and the Defendant is the owner of the instant lending 402 after reconstruction, who was the owner of the instant lending 202 (the ground floor 2) prior to reconstruction.

B. The head of the instant loan was composed of six households in total with the 6th floor, the 1st floor, and the 2nd floor before reconstruction. However, around April 2012, the head of the instant loan, including the Defendant, entered into a construction contract with the Plaintiff on the construction that, around that time, the head of the instant loan and the Plaintiff, “the head of the household shall be awarded a contract for the reconstruction work with the Plaintiff with the amount of 412,54,000 won prior to reconstruction including the Defendant, while the head of the household shall be awarded a contract for the reconstruction work with the Plaintiff with the amount of 48,757,333 won per household (hereinafter referred to as “the instant reconstruction contract”) and the construction work thereunder.

[The loan of this case was reconstructed with 120,54,00 won for the previous householder and 292,54,000 won for the remainder of the construction cost (i.e., 412,54,000 won - 120,000 won for - 120,000 won for each household) as agreed that the above householder will share equally among the two stories, 3 stories, 2 households of 4 stories, 5 stories, and 15 stories of 5 stories of 5 stories of 5 stories of 5 stories of 5 stories of 5 stories of 5 stories of 4 stories of this case. The plaintiff and the head of 5 stories of the loan of this case have been assigned to the existing householder of the construction cost before re-building.] (c)

The Defendant’s mother, upon receiving the consent to re-building from the householder of the instant loan prior to re-building, played an active role in the prompt progress of re-building of the instant loan, such as a front letter in resolving the migration problems of the tenants.

On August 2012, the Plaintiff started the instant reconstruction work and completed the construction of the first patrol officer on February 2013. Accordingly, the Defendant on February 5, 2013.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2020.01.16 2019나2033010

-창원지방법원마산지원 2016.04.01 2015가합100600

-창원지방법원 2019.07.11 2018나59691

-창원지방법원 밀양지원 2018.08.22 2018가단10366

-서울남부지방법원 2016.12.22 2016가합890