(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.06.11 2014나7790 | 리걸엔진

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) 전주지방법원 2015.06.11 2014나7790

공사대금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, KRW 4,280,000 against the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff shall be fully repaid from January 7, 2014.

Reasons

1. The following facts can be acknowledged, either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 11.

The Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant for construction cost of KRW 30,00,000 with the construction period from August 30, 2013 to November 11, 2013, under which the construction period is from August 30, 2013 and the construction is to be built on the land outside C and four lots (hereinafter “instant building”), and completed the construction by starting the construction.

B. In order for the Defendant to obtain approval for the use of the building of this case from Gosan City, the Plaintiff was performing a road work that opened an access road to the building of this case on the D and E 2 lots in front of the building of this case. However, it was pointed out that it was erroneous for the Plaintiff to enter the building due to the entry of the building of this case from Gosan City, and completed an additional construction that sets up a road boundary stone for the entry of the road of this case (hereinafter “instant additional construction”), and the Defendant obtained approval for the use of the building of this case from Gosan City on November 11, 2013.

C. The Plaintiff’s expenses incurred for the instant supplementary construction are KRW 10,590,00 in total, and among them, KRW 5,350,00 in expenses for the remainder of the cost of materials, excluding KRW 5,240,00 in expenses for the remainder of the cost of materials, equipment costs (= construction cost of KRW 3,000 in entry = KRW 5,350,000 in 5,000 in 540,000 in 160,000 in 450,000 in 1,60,000 in 1,60,000 in 1,60,000 in 1,00,000 in 1,00,000 in 1,00,000 in 1,00,000 in sckerack for the outstanding amount of KRW 300,00 in total in 30,00 in total).

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff alleged by the parties did not intend from the first new construction of the building of this case in the case of the instant additional construction, but the construction was conducted in accordance with the agreement with the defendant in the process of obtaining approval for use from the next City of Busan. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the instant additional construction cost to the plaintiff.

For this reason,

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2015.02.27 2014가단4905

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.08.24 2017나66079

-서울북부지방법원 2017.09.27 2017가단3915

-광주고등법원 (전주) 2017.03.16 2016나11078

-전주지방법원군산지원 2013.10.10 2012가단16730