logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.04.26 2015나3738
공사대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 2014, the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s agent, contracted repair works for each building located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D and E from the Defendant’s wife. Around that time, the Plaintiff started repair works for each building (hereinafter “instant repair works”).

B. During the process of the instant repair work, the Plaintiff was requested to perform additional construction works, such as installation of windows, visits, and screeners on the part of the Defendant. On September 2014, the Plaintiff completed all of the instant repair work including the said additional construction works (hereinafter “instant repair work”).

C. From August 25, 2014 to September 25, 2014, the Plaintiff received 32 million won in total from the Defendant as the construction price of the instant case between the period from August 25, 2014 and September 25, 2014, and thereafter received KRW 33 million in total from the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 4, Eul evidence 5-1, 2, Eul evidence 1-1, 2, Eul evidence 3-1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) the Plaintiff entered into a contract on the instant repair work with the Defendant, set the construction cost at KRW 32 million; (b) thereafter, the Plaintiff completed the additional construction work at the Defendant’s request; and (c) the expenses incurred therefrom are KRW 7,753,00.0. The Plaintiff agreed with C on September 25, 2014 as KRW 2.5 million; (c) the Defendant paid KRW 1 million out of the amount agreed on the said additional construction work; and (d) the Defendant did not pay the remainder of 1,50,000 won. Therefore, as the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant cancels the Defendant’s nonperformance, the Defendant was obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 39,753,00 in total construction cost (= KRW 32 million,753,75,000,0000, KRW 336,37,375,3705,300,375.

arrow