logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2018.02.27 2016가단62570
공사대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or may be recognized in full view of the statements or images of Gap evidence Nos. 3, 9, 10, 14 through 19, 22, 23, and 25, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 8 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the witness C's testimony, and the whole purport of the pleadings.

On April 16, 2015, the Defendant contracted the construction of safety facilities at the Busan Seo-gu D construction site (hereinafter “instant construction site”) from Daewoo Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Treatment Construction”) to the Plaintiff on April 16, 2015. Around April 2015, the Defendant subcontracted the construction of the ground-breaking section, the safety turbs, and the installation of soil turbs in the said construction site (hereinafter “instant construction”).

B. The Plaintiff, by inserting materials, such as pipes, clean lamps, etc. leased from E, to the construction site of the instant construction site, carried out construction works, including safe refluences, until July 20, 2015.

C. C worked as the team leader at the construction site of this case from April 2015 to August 2015, 2015.

On July 20, 2015, the Plaintiff rescinded the instant construction contract with the Defendant.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff paid KRW 20,950,000 among the instant construction works from April 2015 to July 20, 2015, and paid KRW 27,950,000 among them, and did not pay KRW 7,950,000 in the aggregate of KRW 7,95,000 and value-added tax KRW 795,00.

8,745,00 won is claimed.

B. In addition, the Plaintiff brought in the pipe, clamping, and other materials for the instant construction project, but only part of the materials were released after the cancellation of the instant construction contract and failed to release the materials as indicated below, and thus, the Plaintiff should either refund or compensate for damages equivalent to the rent of KRW 4,596,602 from August 1, 2015 to the end of January 2016, and the amount of unjust enrichment of KRW 18,504,200, which is the market price of the said materials.

The name standard input quantity, the quantity of the materials taken out, the quantity of the materials taken out, the quantity of which is fixed 700. 439.

arrow