logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.08.19 2015가단53700
양수금등
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs are oil supply companies that supply marine fuel oil used for maritime equipment owned or operated by the non-party company (hereinafter “non-party company”) to Yongho Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “non-party company”).

B. On June 4, 2010, the non-party company entered into a subcontract agreement (hereinafter “instant subcontract agreement”) with the Defendant with respect to dredging works among the construction works for the navigation of Gyeongdogroscing paths and the development of port site (hereinafter “instant construction”) and implemented the instant construction works upon modification of the contract for six times.

C. On December 3, 2012, Nonparty Company: (a) transferred KRW 57,636,700 to Plaintiff 1; (b) KRW 910,875,275,275 to Plaintiff 2; and (c) KRW 397,963,100 to Plaintiff 3; and (b) KRW 1,053,514,00 to Plaintiff 4; and (c) sent to the Defendant, on December 4, 2012, the mail proving the contents of the assignment of claims as above, and thereafter, the mail proving the contents of the assignment of claims reaches the Defendant.

On the other hand, on October 18, 2012, the Plaintiffs received a seizure and collection order as to each of the following amount among the claims for construction price of the non-party company based on the instant subcontract on October 18, 2012. Each claim seizure and collection order was served on the Defendant on October 22, 2012.

1) Plaintiff 1: 57,636,70 won (in Busan District Court Decision 2012 Tasan 23041) 2: Plaintiff 910,875,275 won (in Busan District Court Decision 2012 Tasan 23043) 3: Plaintiff 3:3:397,963,100 won (in Busan District Court Decision 2012 Tasan 23043), Plaintiff 4: 1,053,514,00 won (in Busan District Court 2012 Tasan 23042), and the purport of the whole pleadings as a whole.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiffs asserted that the defendant gave a subcontract to the non-party company at an unfair price in violation of Article 4 of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act, thereby having the non-party company KRW 7 billion.

arrow