logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.02.20 2018가합524554
점유회수의 소
Text

1. All claims filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against D and Defendant E, both of which are filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 31, 2015, Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) contracted the construction of new buildings indicated in the attached list of the Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and one parcel of land (hereinafter “instant building”) to F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”).

B. The non-party company subcontracted part of the construction work of the instant building to the Plaintiffs as follows.

1) On May 23, 2016, Plaintiff A entered into a subcontract on the installation of machinery and equipment works with the trade name of H. 201. Plaintiff B entered into a subcontract on the construction of machinery and equipment works with the trade name of “I” around January 2017.

3) On May 8, 2017, Plaintiff C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) entered into a subcontract for metal and creative works with the Nonparty Company. (c) The Nonparty Company was paid KRW 3.79 billion at the cost of construction from Defendant D until August 14, 2017, but the construction of the instant building was suspended on September 23, 2017, and Defendant D entered into a contract for the remaining construction of the instant building with Defendant E around January 23, 2018. [based on recognition] without dispute; (iv) Party A’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 8, Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 14, and 15 (including serial numbers), and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. The plaintiffs asserted that part of the new construction of the building of this case was subcontracted by the non-party company and did not receive the construction cost. As such, they installed a banner indicating that it is under the exercise of lien at the site of the construction of the building of this case, and installed locks at the entrance of the above construction site. The plaintiffs exercised lien by directly accessing the building of this case or by indirectly occupying it through the manager who has employed some persons related to the claim.

During that period, the Defendants were construction of the instant building around March 26, 2018.

arrow