logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원경주지원 2014.11.25 2012가단7802
공사대금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 21,366,69 with respect to the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from August 1, 2012 to December 3, 2012, and the next day.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff alleged by the parties: (1) on February 20, 2012, the plaintiff was awarded a contract for the production and installation of five components, such as presses, mother carba, Schlage, sandd, scrap railing, etc. from among the 20 components necessary for the production and installation of 11 labels to be installed in the defendant factory from the defendant on February 20, 2012, and the remaining 15 components were to be produced and installed by the defendant on his own.

However, the plaintiff produced and installed the remaining 15 components at the defendant's request, and the expenses incurred therein are 47,104,420 won.

② Although the Plaintiff produced and installed labels in accordance with the design drawings provided by the Defendant, the Plaintiff re-manufactured the parts that had already been manufactured and installed due to the error in the drawings provided by the Defendant and the circumstances of the Defendant factory, or changed the installation location, and paid KRW 22,065,675 at the expense.

③ Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff additional and modified construction cost KRW 69,170,00 (=47,104,420 won) 22,065,675 won, and damages for delay.

Defendant: (1) The composition that the Plaintiff produced and installed additional products is included in the scope of the original contract agreement.

② The Plaintiff’s construction work on the ground that the Plaintiff made a mistake in the contact, etc.

2. The key issue of this part of the judgment on the claim for additional construction costs is the scope of the contract agreement concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. Accordingly, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by adding up the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of appraiser B’s appraisal, it is reasonable to view that the composition that the Plaintiff produced and installed additional construction costs is included in the scope of the contract agreement concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

Therefore, the part of the plaintiff's claim for additional construction cost will be added to that amount.

arrow