beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.
3. The parties of the first instance judgment are parties.
Reasons
1. The reasoning for this decision is that the court’s reasoning is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination as to the cause of the instant claim
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) against C, the Plaintiff: (a) entered into the instant design contract with the Defendant in favor of the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2015Da5179791; (b) KRW 12,4520,000,000,000 for the cost of the instant structural design contract; (c) KRW 115,500,000 for the program file (ESAD ftile) as to the result of the instant structural design contract; and (d) KRW 341,416,460 for the additional service related to the instant structural design contract; or (e) damages claim arising from nonperformance of the payment obligation (hereinafter “additional service charges, etc.”); (b) However, C entered into the instant design service contract with the Defendant in subrogation of the Defendant, which is a contractor performing the duty to perform the design service, and accordingly, (e) the Plaintiff has a claim against the Defendant, such as the file cost, and other additional service charges.
3) In addition, if the other party who entered into the design service contract of this case with the defendant is not C but B (D), the plaintiff is a creditor of C, who is entitled to exercise the right to direct payment of the service price that C has against the defendant under Article 14(1) of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act (hereinafter “subcontract”), or exercise by subrogation the claim against the defendant of B such as file price claim and additional service cost, etc., which C may exercise on behalf of the defendant in subrogation of B in sequence, in sequence with C and B. Thus, the defendant is entitled to exercise on the part of the plaintiff 581,436,460 won in total.