장기계속공사계약의 공기연장과 추가간접공사비에 대한 소고:추가간접공사비 청구에 대한 하급심 판결을 중심으로

Recently, legal debates regarding overhead cost caused by a delay tend to increase sharply. Especially, in terms of government works which have been developed during fiscal years, these works are generally based on long-term continuing contracts. However, a main feature of this contract, double-layered contracts regulation, appears to cause issues related to overhead cost adjustment resulting from a delay. In contrast, given that cases of district courts or high courts dealing with overhead cost in long-term continuing contracts, there are a lot of conflicts about legal issues from binding effect of entire project contracts to calculation of the cost. And these chaos seem to continue, unfortunately. Therefore, this essay examines the legal requirements not only to extend time but also to adjust overhead cost in order to deal with issues concerning overhead cost caused by a delay in long-term continuing contracts on the basis of relevant rules and general terms and conditions of government construction contract. And then, in the case that there are conflicts between a entire project contract and each annual contract which belong to a same long-term continuing contract, this essay tries to find solutions based on an argument that a long-term contract is rooted from a continuing contract and that an annual contract has a dominant position compared to a general contract. Alongside with legal aspects, given that long-term continuing contracts tend not only to provoke complicated issues but also to erode legal stability in government contract system, this essay suggests that continuing expenditure contracts should replace long-term continuing contracts in spite of fiscal difficulties.