logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.10.04 2018나56572
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. (1) On April 24, 2014, the Defendant, Nonparty E, and I, under the initiative of the Defendant husband M, jointly purchased the land of H, 3,412 square meters of the land in the land of a electric source and completed the registration of ownership transfer.

Since then, the above woodland was divided into several parcels, and the defendant et al. owned the land divided.

On March 15, 2016, the defendant purchased J-J forest divided by I.

(2) On March 24, 2016, the Plaintiff appears to be a clerical error in the JJ, as the introduction of C, an indoor interior interior interior interior interior fishery business operator, and the “Work Site D” described in the J Forest Construction Contract (Evidence A) signed by the Defendant and the Defendant.

On September 6, 2016, one unit of single-story housing of the size of 45 square meters was entered into a contract for construction (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction contract”). From September 1, 2016, the first police officer (the date of completion of construction works shall be indicated as construction works, electrical construction works (the construction of a ceiling boat, electric light, electric power plant, and various equipment) and installation works until September 6, 2016) (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction contract”).

However, while entering into the instant construction contract, the original and the Defendant merely accepted only the design drawings, and did not prepare a quotation or specifications to identify detailed construction details, construction methods, and the amount of the construction cost by construction item.

(3) The Plaintiff received a down payment of KRW 20 million from the Defendant on the date of the conclusion of the instant construction contract, and around that time, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and C agreed that the interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior design during the instant construction work shall be entrusted to C, and the construction cost shall be paid directly by the Defendant to C (hereinafter “Agreement on Direct Payment”).

(4) On May 27, 2016, the Plaintiff received additional KRW 30 million from the Defendant as part of the instant construction contract amount through E.

(5) On May 3, 2016, Nonparty K (the representative director of the Plaintiff) was present at around C and Nonparty L, the E’s agent, and KRW 300 million.

arrow