beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 111,157,194 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from October 4, 2013 to October 21, 2013 for the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff was awarded a contract with the Defendant for the construction of a new piracy apartment on the ground of the high-class high-gun, Gangwon-do Jong-gun, Gangwon-do, Seogdong-gun, and completed the said construction work on or around December 201.
At the time of completion of the above construction work, the amount of the construction cost settlement amount to be paid by the Plaintiff from the Defendant is KRW 327,332,545, excluding KRW 51,665,00,00, the amount of the Plaintiff’s share of the said construction work, 378,997,545 (=378,97,545 - 51,65,00).
B. Meanwhile, Japan Construction Co., Ltd., which received a subcontract for the said construction from the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Monthly Construction”), asserted against the Plaintiff that there was KRW 525,364,709 of the subcontract price claim under the said subcontract, and filed a provisional attachment application against the Plaintiff for the said claim for the payment of the construction price against the Defendant by designating the debtor as the Plaintiff and the third debtor as the Defendant, and this court rendered a provisional attachment order against the claim for the payment of the construction price against the Plaintiff on December 28, 2011.
C. As a lawsuit on the foregoing provisional attachment determination, construction thereafter filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking payment of the said subcontract consideration (this Court 201Gahap6970), but this court rendered a judgment dismissing the said claim on July 11, 2013.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff received the decision of revocation of provisional attachment from this court on September 17, 2013, and cancelled provisional attachment execution on September 26, 2013, and the notification of cancellation was issued to the Defendant on September 30, 2013.
On October 4, 2013, the day after the notice of cancellation of provisional attachment was delivered to the Defendant, the Plaintiff claimed KRW 327,332,545, which was provisionally seized to the Defendant. However, the Defendant paid only KRW 216,175,351 out of the above construction price, and did not pay the remainder KRW 111,157,194 to the Plaintiff.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Gap evidence 6-1, 2
2. Determination: