logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원평택지원 2020.12.11 2019가단53639
공사대금
Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 8, 2018, the Defendant entered into a contract for construction works with the owner of Pyeongtaek-si and six lots of ground construction works (hereinafter “factory construction works”), setting the construction cost of 600 million won (excluding value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the construction period from March 7, 2018 to July 20, 2018.

B. On March 27, 2018, D entered into a subcontract (hereinafter referred to as “instant subcontract”) with the Plaintiff during the construction of a new factory, setting the construction cost of KRW 60 million for the reinforced soil retaining wall construction (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction”) and the construction period from March 27, 2018 to April 30, 2018.

C. According to the construction specifications attached to the instant subcontract agreement, the Plaintiff and D set the construction cost of the instant subcontract as KRW 60 million (=480 x 125,000) by calculating the unit price of KRW 125,000 in a quantity of 480 square meters as the height of the retaining wall, and the length of the retaining wall is 130 meters.

D did not complete the new construction of a factory with the Defendant and completed the construction on May 16, 2018. On the same day, D agreed that the Defendant and its employees waives the construction after setting the term of 170 million won (hereinafter “instant settlement agreement”), and written and issued a written waiver of the construction, written agreement, and input statement to the Defendant.

At the time of the settlement agreement of this case, D and the defendant set the settlement agreement amount of KRW 170 million based on D’s inputs written and delivered by D. According to the above inputs written statement, the settlement agreement of this case includes KRW 60 million for the Plaintiff’s construction cost of this case, which is the sewage supplier.

E. On the other hand, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction work around April 30, 2018, prior to the agreement to waive D construction works.

[Identification Evidence] Gap evidence 1, 5, Eul evidence 7, Eul evidence 8-1, 2, Eul evidence 9, each of Eul evidence 1-7, Eul evidence 10-7, appraiser E's appraisal result, and appraiser.

arrow