logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2017.01.26 2014가단27623
추심금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 36,300,000 as well as 6% per annum from September 13, 2014 to January 26, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that carries on the business of manufacturing wooden boxes, etc., and the Defendant is a person who carries on the business of painting facilities with the trade name “B.”

B. On October 29, 2013, the Defendant concluded a contract for a construction project with C processing, sub-production, and installation (hereinafter “instant construction project”) on a fixed period from October 29, 2013 to December 20, 2013, with the Defendant’s construction cost of KRW 640,000,000 (Additional Tax), and the construction period from October 30, 2013 to December 20, 2013.

C. On December 27, 2013, the Plaintiff was issued a provisional attachment order of KRW 36,300,000 (hereinafter “instant provisional attachment order”) among the claims for advance payment and construction cost, etc. to be paid under a contract, etc. related to construction works of the instant construction works, etc. (hereinafter “the instant claim for construction cost”). The provisional attachment order was served on the Defendant on December 30, 2013.

On May 30, 2014, the Plaintiff transferred the foregoing provisional attachment to a provisional attachment under Suwon District Court Branch Branch 2014TTTT8183, and additionally attached KRW 2,188,074, out of the instant construction price claims owned by the Defendant, and received a decision of the seizure and collection order (hereinafter “instant collection order”) that the said amount may be collected, and the original of the said decision was served on June 5, 2014 to the Defendant, the garnishee.

E. On June 4, 2015, the Defendant rendered a favorable judgment against the Defendant on the following grounds: (a) on June 4, 2015, the Defendant filed a claim against the Defendant for damages due to the instant construction defects and delay; and (b) rendered a judgment in favor of the Defendant to pay KRW 221,30,000, and damages for delay thereof, to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 7, Eul evidence No. 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The argument and judgment.

arrow