(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.03.06 2017가단25456

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) 광주지방법원 2019.03.06 2017가단25456

공사대금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 43,025,779 and the amount of KRW 43,019,902 from March 7, 2019 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 23, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the construction cost of KRW 57 million on the ground of the multi-family house C in Yong-gun, Youngnam. On January 5, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the construction cost of KRW 10,579,800, and the additional construction cost of the water tank room around February 2017, with the construction cost of KRW 6.2 million.

B. The unpaid construction cost is 47,779,000 won in total.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, each entry of Gap's 1 through 3 (including virtual number) and the purport of whole pleading

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff a delay payment of KRW 47,779,000 for the remainder of the construction project, except in extenuating circumstances.

B. As to this, the Defendant asserts that since the glass windows constructed by the Plaintiff differently from the design drawing should be replaced, the total cost of KRW 18,828,730, and the sum of the cost of the bathing room construction executed by the Defendant after paying the Defendant’s own cost, KRW 5,80,000,000 shall be compensated by the Plaintiff, and the said damage claim against the Plaintiff shall be offset by the said damage claim against the Plaintiff.

According to the appraiser D's appraisal result, the construction of this case is not consistent with the mold, and the double hold was replaced by plastic hold, unlike design, unlike design, and three bathing rooms have a defect not constructed by reinforced glass, so it can be recognized that the difference between construction cost of 1,323,059 won for the replacement of a shock network, 214,390 won for reinforcement and plastic hold, and 1,221,649 won for reconstruction costs, total amount of 4,759,098 won for reconstruction costs, as the defendant's assertion of set-off against the above amount is well-grounded, but there is no evidence to support that the above windows and bathing doors need to be replaced in whole, and this excess is without merit.

3. Conclusion.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원부천지원 2015.10.14 2015가단2142

-인천지방법원 2017.11.16 2016가단56709

-전주지방법원군산지원 2015.03.26 2014가합1258

-수원지방법원안양지원 2014.12.11 2014가합2858

-전주지방법원 2016.05.25 2014가합8355