logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.07.19 2019나538
손해배상(지)
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. Basic facts

A. On March 31, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to contract for the equal-heat repair and re-design construction of A Apartment (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) (hereinafter “instant construction contract”). The content of the contract entered into at the time is as follows.

1. The name of construction: A apartment rupture repair and reconstruction construction work;

3. Date of commencement: April 10, 2016.

4. The scheduled completion date: July 9, 2016.

5. Contract amount: 580,800,000 won (including value-added tax); 12. The rate of liquidated damages for delay: 1/100.

B. On July 19, 2016, the Defendant submitted the instant construction completion report to the Plaintiff. On July 27, 2016, the supervisor of the instant construction project submitted the instant construction completion confirmation to the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. As the Plaintiff completed the instant construction work on July 27, 2016 after the construction period of 18 days specified in the instant construction contract, the Plaintiff was obligated to pay the Plaintiff penalty for delay 10,454,400 won (=the contract price of KRW 580,800,000 x the number of days delayed x 18 days x 1/1000) and delay damages therefrom, as prescribed in the instant construction contract.

B. At the time of the conclusion of the instant construction contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant decided to exclude the period from the date when it is impossible to work due to rain, and the Defendant again calculated the period of construction by taking into account the number of rain days, the Defendant completed the construction within the construction period. 2) Even if the number of rain days is not considered, the Defendant was granted the Plaintiff the approval for extension of the construction period and the exemption from the penalty for delay. Therefore, there is no obligation

3. Determination

A. Where the construction of this case was suspended during the construction work completion and the last process scheduled to be completed, it shall be deemed that the construction has not been completed. However, the construction has completed the last process scheduled to be completed and its main structure.

arrow