(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.05.17 2016가단11424

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) 의정부지방법원 2017.05.17 2016가단11424

공사대금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 23,326,750 for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from July 16, 2016 to May 17, 2017.

Reasons

1. The judgment on the cause of the claim is that the Plaintiff was awarded a contract with the Defendant on December 30, 2015 for the construction cost of KRW 120 million (excluding value-added tax) of the construction cost for screen golf courses for the construction of the golf club D No. 504 and 505 on the trade name of “C”, and the Plaintiff completed the construction by February 5, 2016, and the additional construction cost of KRW 17.5 million (excluding value-added tax) was incurred due to the said additional construction. There is no dispute between the parties, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 127,923,250 from the Defendant to the said construction cost.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of the construction cost of KRW 23,326,750 [= (including KRW 12 million) x 110% (including value-added tax) - 127,923,250] and damages for delay.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The defendant, according to the plaintiff's instruction, remitted 3.1 million won to E, a business operator related to the instant construction project, 2.0 million won to F, and 1.9 million won to G. Thus, the plaintiff's claim equivalent to the above aggregate amount was extinguished by the plaintiff's payment of the construction cost. However, it is difficult to recognize the fact that each of the above amounts was remitted to E, etc. in relation to the plaintiff's construction cost of the instant construction project, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the defendant's defense is without merit.

B. The Defendant’s defense of defect also raises a defense to the effect that a large number of defects occurred in the part executed by the Plaintiff and offset it against the damage claim arising therefrom (i.e., the Defendant did not clearly claim a set-off, but the Defendant’s assertion was not sufficient to completely verify the existence or scope of the defect in the Defendant’s assertion, and the cost of repairing the defect, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

The defendant shall prove.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2019.07.16 2018가합110616

-수원지방법원 2016.01.08 2015나19176

-수원지방법원 2016.01.13 2015나20312

-의정부지방법원 2016.11.04 2016가단20954

-서울행정법원 2019.01.18 2018구단19347