logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.11.26 2020가단9393
손해배상
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is running a construction business of windows and hardware with the trade name of “D”.

B. E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) awarded a contract to F for a new construction of Gyeonggi-gu G G, Gyeonggi-gu G, and F subcontracted to the Plaintiff the construction of the new construction of G (hereinafter “instant construction”) with the cost of construction KRW 87 million around March 20, 2018, setting the construction cost as KRW 87 million.

C. The Plaintiff completed the instant construction work on May 10, 2018, but was not paid KRW 42 million out of the construction cost by F.

E and F prepared to the Plaintiff a “written statement of confirmation of direct payment of subcontract price” (hereinafter “instant agreement”) that E would directly pay to the Plaintiff the construction price of KRW 42 million, but the Plaintiff did not receive the construction price of KRW 42 million from E.

E. The Defendant served as a representative director of E around the time when E prepares the instant agreement to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the cause of the claim was caused by the tort, such as being useful to pay the subcontract price directly to the Plaintiff, even though the Defendant took overall charge of all acts as the representative director of E at the time when the instant agreement was prepared, and confirmed that he would have ordered the Plaintiff to pay the subcontract price directly.

Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay to the plaintiff 42 million won and damages for delay due to the agreed amount or tort.

B. In light of the fact that the party who promised the direct payment of the construction price to the Plaintiff under the instant agreement is E Co., Ltd., the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant, other than E Co., Ltd., agreed to pay the construction price to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant

arrow