(영문) 전주지방법원 2019.07.25 2019가합2611

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 전주지방법원 2019.07.25 2019가합2611

공사대금청구및유치권확인

Text

1. The part concerning the claim for confirmation of lien among the instant lawsuit is dismissed.

2. The defendant shall pay 1,529,000,000 won to the plaintiff and this shall apply.

Reasons

1. Ex officio determination as to whether the part requesting the confirmation of lien is lawful

A. On February 1, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with the Defendant, who was awarded a new construction contract for the instant building C (hereinafter referred to as “instant real estate”), and with the Defendant, among the new construction works, the construction cost of KRW 1,529,00,000 (including surtax) and the construction period from February 3, 2018 to May 10, 2018, and completed the instant construction work on May 30, 2018.

However, the Defendant did not pay the instant construction cost to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff now exercises the right of retention with respect to the instant real estate as the preserved right, thereby seeking confirmation of the right of retention to the Defendant.

B. We examine ex officio the Plaintiff’s right of retention confirmation on the legitimacy of the part of the Plaintiff’s claim.

A lawsuit for confirmation may only be permitted as a lawful lawsuit only when there is a danger existing in the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status, and the obtaining of a judgment of confirmation is the most effective way to resolve the dispute, and it is recognized that there is no other effective and adequate means than receiving a judgment of confirmation.

However, even according to the Plaintiff’s assertion, it is difficult to view that there is a specific legal interest to seek confirmation as to the existence of a lien on the instant real estate separately from seeking payment of the construction cost against the Defendant, who is merely the contractor of the instant construction, who re-subcontracted the instant construction project, which is part of the new construction project regarding the instant real estate by the

Therefore, there is no benefit of confirmation as to the claim for lien confirmation among the lawsuits in this case.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2021.02.17 2020가단13914

-전주지방법원 2020.01.30 2019가합5320

-수원지방법원 2016.01.13 2015가단30226

-서울동부지방법원 2017.05.12 2016가단31603

-창원지방법원 2015.09.16 2014나13475