logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2021.01.20 2019나75565
공사대금청구
Text

Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked, and such revocation shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 27, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the construction of multi-household housing and Class 1 neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “new construction of this case”) with the construction period fixed from August 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015, the contract amount of which is KRW 746,068,00 (the amount included in value added tax) and the construction of this case commenced on August 2015.

B. On March 29, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant to change the total floor area of the instant newly constructed construction from 496.32 square meters to 728.57 square meters, with the main content of changing the contract amount into 1,030,000,000 won, and with the construction period from August 1, 2015 to May 25, 2016 (hereinafter “instant modified contract”); and on August 16, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant to finally amend the construction contract with the content of the instant modified contract to KRW 20,70,000 (i) the additional construction amount for the instant newly constructed construction to KRW 1,050,700,000, and the final settlement amount to KRW 1,030,000 under the instant modified contract (hereinafter “instant contract”).

On June 2016, the Plaintiff completed almost most of the instant new construction works. On October 12, 2016, the Plaintiff was inspected for completion of new construction works.

(d)

From July 31, 2015 to September 16, 2016, the Plaintiff received a total of KRW 960,700,000 from the Defendant as the construction price.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 10, Eul evidence No. 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff was paid a total of KRW 960,700,000 from the defendant as the construction price, and returned KRW 20,700,000 to the defendant, so the plaintiff's actual payment was 940,700,700,000 (=960,700,000 - 20,000,000), and the unpaid construction price was 110.

arrow