logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2015.11.26 2015가합21353
약정금
Text

1. The Defendants jointly and severally against the Plaintiff KRW 650,000,000 and Defendant A Co., Ltd. with respect thereto on May 22, 2015.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of Gap evidence No. 1-1 to 5 of the judgment on the cause of the claim and the entire arguments, the defendant corporation Gap agreed to pay to the plaintiff KRW 260 million as to the construction cost incurred between the plaintiff and the plaintiff from August 5, 2013 to December 30, 2013; and the defendant Eul agreed to pay KRW 390,000,000 to the plaintiff by April 30, 2015; and the defendant Eul's joint and several liability for the payment of the construction cost as of the same day.

According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendants are jointly and severally obligated to pay to the Defendant Company A with the amount of KRW 650,000,000 for the construction cost agreed upon to the Plaintiff as well as damages for delay at the rate of KRW 15% per annum from May 22, 2015, the following day after the duplicate of the complaint of this case was served to the Defendant Company A, and from May 23, 2015 to the day after the day of full payment, the duplicate of the complaint of this case was served to the Defendant Company B, and from May 23, 2015 to the day of full payment.

2. As to the Defendant A’s assertion, the Defendant Co., Ltd. received the said construction from the former executor on September 23, 2014, and claimed construction cost that the Plaintiff did not receive from the former executor, the Plaintiff agreed to obtain additional loans after completion and pay the construction cost. However, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the said construction cost cannot be paid because it did not have any remaining construction work. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the said assertion by the Defendant Co., Ltd., for lack of merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants of this case against the defendants is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow