logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.04 2014가합35155
공사대금
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 86,196,00 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) for KRW 86,196,00 and its amount from July 3, 2013 to May 30, 2014.

Reasons

The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall be judged together.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 15, 2012, the Defendant entered into a construction contract with a school juristic person A graduate school (hereinafter “A”) on the terms and conditions that “B” was awarded between KRW 6,540,00,000 (including value-added tax; KRW 6,882,10,000 at the final settlement of accounts; KRW 6,882,10,000 at the time of design modification) and the construction period until February 28, 2013.

B. On December 28, 2012, the Defendant entered into a construction contract between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff with the content that the instant construction work portion of the said “B” (hereinafter “instant construction work”) shall be KRW 572,00,000, and the construction period shall be from December 28, 2012 to February 28, 2013 (hereinafter “instant subcontract”). The main part of the instant construction work was tin works inside and outside the Dong-dong and repair works at the entrance of the outside entrance of the library.

C. As the above “B” was delayed and could not end up by February 28, 2013, the Defendant extended the construction period to May 20, 2013 between A and B three times. In that process, the portion added by the time of the completion of the construction work, such as the modification of design, etc., was calculated only by the cost of construction, and the Defendant agreed to pay the damages on the side of the school due to the extension of the construction period or the Defendant’s expense.

Plaintiff

In addition, by February 28, 2013, the instant construction was concluded between the Defendant and the Defendant on May 15, 2013, and the instant construction was concluded within the extended construction period.

The Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 42,90,000 (including value added tax) for the design change of the finishing materials C from concrete to private stone, along with the agreed construction cost.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 12 through 14, witness D's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the principal lawsuit

(a)a Party;

arrow