logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.09.05 2017나30297
원인자 부담금
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a key telecommunications business operator under the Telecommunications Business Act that runs the super-high speed information and communications network and the mobile communications service-related business. The Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Korea Electric Power Corporation (hereinafter “Korea Electric Power Corporation”) which legally installed and owns approximately 39 ground poles on the section from 508 meters to A. Sym (hereinafter “the instant road”). The Plaintiff installed a telecommunications line and cable line (hereinafter “the instant telecommunications line”) on the said line and provided neighboring users with communications services, such as the Internet.

B. The Defendant, who is the road management authority of the Mapo-gu Seoul Western-ro, planned to create the instant road as “design Seoul-distance” in order to improve the urban landscape, and accordingly entered into an agreement on May 2009 with the purport to remove the ground power lines of the instant road and concentrate on all power distribution lines.

C. In addition, around May 2009, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to concentrate on the instant communications line installed on the ground line on the ground line of the instant road.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that he will later claim construction costs incurred from the broadband Construction under the Telecommunications Business Act, and carried out the broadband Construction of the instant communications line, and disbursed the total of KRW 133,144,290 for the construction cost.

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7 (including branch numbers, if any), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. Article 51 of the former Telecommunications Business Act (wholly amended by Act No. 10166, Mar. 22, 2010; hereinafter “the Act”) provides that a person who requested the underground transmission of telecommunications lines shall bear the expenses. The Defendant is a part of the “Design Seoul Distance Development Project”.

arrow