(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.09.14 2015가단44034

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.09.14 2015가단44034

공사대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person who operates the interior works company under the trade name of “C”, and the Defendant is a person who operates the Empt in the building located in Sacheon City D (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. Around June 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to supply and demand interior works on the first floor of the instant building.

C. From August 27, 2014 to December 30, 2014, the Defendant paid a total of KRW 136 million to the Plaintiff (i.e., KRW 15 million on August 27, 2014, KRW 15 million on September 5, 2014, KRW 30 million on September 29, 2014, KRW 15 million on October 7, 2014, KRW 26 million on October 28, 2014, KRW 30 million on December 30, 2014).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2-1, 2, and 3-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant completed the construction by receiving a contract for interior works for the second floor other than the first floor of the instant building, and the total construction cost (=10,89,862 won for the first floor) is KRW 153,227,983 (= KRW 42,328,121 for the second floor).

Since the Defendant paid only KRW 136 million among them, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remaining construction price of KRW 17,227,983 (=153,227,983 – 136 million) to the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendant and the Defendant concluded a Rotterdam construction contract only with respect to the first floor of the instant building.

The defendant trusted the plaintiff's words that the Corporation is well progress, and paid all the construction cost as requested by the plaintiff, but the Corporation failed to perform it properly, and there were many defects.

During the process of interior construction for the first floor among the instant buildings, the Defendant heard the horses to F, a store operator on the second floor among the instant buildings, and introduced the Plaintiff to F. As such, the Defendant is not obliged to pay the interior construction cost for the second floor among the instant buildings.

3. Determination

A. The plaintiff is the defendant in addition to the first floor of the building in this case.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2016.03.15 2014가단124392

-광주지방법원 2016.02.18 2014가단61475

-대전지방법원 2016.12.23 2016나7430

-울산지방법원 2016.02.17 2013가합1651

-울산지방법원 2014.07.23 2013가단11583