(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.09.20 2015가단56719

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 2016.09.20 2015가단56719

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) with the Defendant from June 16, 2015 to August 15, 2015 (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) with the contractor, the contractor, the construction amount of KRW 209,00,000 (including value-added tax), and with the contents of the construction work among the C works in the Gyeongnam Development Group, with the steel frame, steel reinforced concrete/markets, and Changho-si/Sho-si, and the construction period from June 16, 2015 to August 15.

B. However, the defendant unilaterally terminated the construction contract of this case, and in relation to the termination of the construction contract, there are causes attributable to the defendant as follows.

① Although the Defendant informed the Plaintiff of the error in the survey line and the construction location, the Defendant transferred its responsibility to the Plaintiff and refused to pay the price for the change.

(2) Although the Defendant paid the steel framed materials supplied by a third party at the construction site, it did not pay them.

(3) The Defendant refused to settle the additional construction cost due to the increase in the construction area required by the Defendant.

(hereinafter referred to as “third cause for liability”). (c)

Therefore, as the instant construction contract was reversed due to the Defendant’s fault, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 12,769,000 (30,269,000 which the Plaintiff invested in the construction site of this case - the construction cost of KRW 17,50,00) and damages for delay.

2. Determination

A. The fact that the instant construction contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant; however, the Plaintiff failed to complete the construction by the deadline for completion stipulated in the instant construction contract; and the Defendant’s notification of the termination of the construction contract on September 2, 2015 to the effect that the instant construction contract was terminated does not conflict between the parties.

B. The plaintiff's damage compensation.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원서부지원 2019.01.16 2016가단14892

-서울남부지방법원 2012.10.18 2012노795

-서울북부지방법원 2015.03.25 2013가단30834

-서울북부지방법원 2018.10.18 2016나4547

-수원지방법원 2021.04.02 2020나69427