logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.09.21 2017나1020
추가공사대금 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claim selected by this court are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing the reasoning of the judgment is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the evidence submitted at the court of first instance or the judgment on the plaintiff's new argument is added, and thus, it is cited pursuant to the main sentence

[Supplementary Parts] 5 2 2 Does and 6 Does and 5 Does and 5 Does and 5 Does and 5 Does and 5

Plaintiff

The judgment on the assertion "the plaintiff unilaterally obstructed the construction site of this case under the condition that most of the construction work of this case is completed and some of the completed construction work remains, and the defendant interfered with the execution of the construction work. Since the construction work of this case was unable to be performed due to the defendant's cause attributable to the defendant, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff should pay the plaintiff the amount equivalent to the additional construction works related to the main construction and the main construction, the direct operation, and the design modification additional construction works. However, as seen earlier, the contract was terminated and suspended on the ground that the plaintiff did not complete the construction work by the agreed completion date, and the testimony of the witness A and B of the first instance court is insufficient to recognize that the construction work was suspended due to the defendant'

2. Conclusion, the first instance judgment is justifiable.

The plaintiff's appeal and the claim selective addition by this court are all without merit, and they are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow