(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.12.13 2017나799

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) 서울동부지방법원 2017.12.13 2017나799

공사대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserts that, around October 20, 2014, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the construction work and the delay damages therefrom, as the construction cost of metal windows and glass construction (hereinafter “instant construction”) was completed by being awarded a contract for KRW 70,40,000,00 for the new construction of the commercial housing located in Gyeyang-gu Seoul Metropolitan City B (hereinafter “instant housing”).

However, inasmuch as there is no dispute between the parties or according to the statement of No. 4, the fact that Non-Party C prepared the above No. 1 and affixed the seal of the defendant in the name of the defendant in Gap evidence No. 1, the following stamp image after the defendant's name was affixed with the defendant's seal, it shall not be admitted as evidence, unless there is any assertion or proof as to whether C was granted the right to make such a document by the defendant, and it shall not be admitted as evidence.

As to this, the Plaintiff asserted that C was a field manager of the instant housing construction project and has the authority to conclude a contract with the Plaintiff to subcontract the instant construction project on behalf of the Defendant. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this, and according to the evidence No. 1, the Defendant can only recognize that the said C subcontracted the instant construction project to the said amounting to KRW 560 million.

Unlike the plaintiff's evidence Nos. 2 and 6, it is not sufficient to acknowledge the plaintiff's assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

2. If so, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원성남지원 2016.07.12 2015가단34771

-서울북부지방법원 2015.02.06 2014가단3778

-서울남부지방법원 2017.04.04 2016가단17914

-수원지방법원성남지원 2017.10.27 2017가단200473

-서울북부지방법원 2020.02.11 2019나33553