logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2019.09.26 2018나3734
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. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant entered into a contract for a construction project between the Defendant and D (hereinafter “D”) on August 4, 2015.

2) The construction of the freezing C ground storage (hereinafter referred to as the “instant construction”) in west-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun

(2) The Defendant paid KRW 180 million to D as advance payment pursuant to the instant construction contract, but D discontinued the instant construction work on September 2015, 2015.

B. Plaintiff’s succession to the instant construction contract 1) The Defendant terminated the construction contract with D, and on October 30, 2015, the Plaintiff (the representative director E of the Plaintiff was the actual manager of D.

(3) A contract under which the remaining construction cost of this case was determined and executed from October 30, 2015 to November 20, 2015 (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) as follows: (a) the amount including the advance payment of KRW 180 million; (b) the first progress payment of KRW 94250,000; (c) the second progress payment of KRW 94250,000; and (d) the remainder at the time of completion; and (e) the construction period of the instant construction to KRW 33,00,000 (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).

(2) Upon the Plaintiff’s request, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 50 million on November 10, 2015, and KRW 1500,000 on December 31, 2015. At the Plaintiff’s request, the Defendant directly paid KRW 69,792,640,00 in total as construction and material payments to F, G, and H (I), a subordinate company of the Plaintiff, from January 4, 2016 to March 7, 2016.

C. The Plaintiff’s discontinuance and completion of the instant construction was continued to perform the instant construction, and the construction was discontinued on January 2016 on the ground that the construction was unpaid, and the Defendant followed the instant construction and completed the construction.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap’s 1 through 7, 20, 21 evidence, Eul’s 1 through 6, 13 through 16 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)’s contents or images, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. Plaintiff D’s construction of this case.

arrow