(영문) 인천지방법원 2014.09.04 2013가단86624

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) 인천지방법원 2014.09.04 2013가단86624

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From around 2005, the Defendant was in charge of steel-frame construction among the new construction works of the building on the land of Gangwon-gun C, D, and E, and the Plaintiff was in charge of the unused part among the above construction works, and F was in charge of the total voting.

B. On June 30, 2006, the auction procedure was initiated for the above lands, and the defendant filed a lien on the claim for construction payment of approximately KRW 88,60,000 for the above D building, KRW 91,20,000 for the above building, KRW 96,000 for the plaintiff's construction payment for the above building, KRW 96,00,000 for the above building, and KRW 165,000 for the above building, and KRW 165,000 for the above building.

C. G was awarded a successful bid for the buildings of Nos. 101, 102, 201, and 202 above E on May 6, 2008.

In arbitration of the agreement on the waiver of the right of retention between the Plaintiff, F and G, the Defendant stated on April 28, 2008, that “the successful bidder of the auction is a seat-free tin box from I. The successful bidder of the auction is 15% of the amount of the claim reported by the successful bidder of the auction. All of our three persons together can receive KRW 65,00,000,000.”

However, on March 2008, the Defendant received 50,000,000 won in return for the waiver of the right of retention from G and K at the time, and agreed to receive 150,000,000 won in return for the waiver of the right of retention from the Defendant and K, and received 70,000,000 won on March 31, 2008, and agreed to receive 80,000,000 won in return for the waiver of the right of retention from the Plaintiff and F.

On April 28, 2008, the Defendant received a written waiver of the right of retention from the Plaintiff and F, and caused G successful bidders to exercise the ownership of the above building without any burden of the right of retention, and then Defendant 26,000,000 won paid from G in return for the waiver of the right of retention (which is equivalent to 15% of the reported amount of the right of retention by the Defendant), Plaintiff 14,00,000,000 won (which is equivalent to 15% of the reported amount of the right of retention by the Plaintiff); and

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원 원주지원 2013.09.10 2013고단169

-인천지방법원 2016.04.22 2015고정3055

-서울동부지방법원 2018.09.18 2018고정475

-서울서부지방법원 2018.03.07 2016고단2644

-대법원 2012. 11. 29. 선고 2012두17995 판결