2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

As to this, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff could not respond to the Plaintiff’s claim because it is difficult to believe whether the Plaintiff actually supplied bricks, etc. to the Defendant’s construction site due to the Plaintiff’s failure to provide documentary evidence, such as the supply contract and the supply contract.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following facts, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff, upon receiving an order from the head of the site office F on behalf of the Defendant, supplied bricks, cements, sand, etc. equivalent to KRW 3,663,440, in the above construction site executed by the Defendant after receiving an order from the head of the site office F on behalf of the Defendant, in addition to the overall purport of the pleadings on the witness D, and some testimonys of the witness E of the trial party.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from August 12, 2017 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the instant complaint sought by the Plaintiff.

① The Plaintiff is a juristic person with the objective of brick manufacturing, wholesale and retail business of construction materials, etc., and the Defendant is a juristic person with the purpose of civil engineering and construction work.

The Defendant contracted with G, H, I, etc. for the Busan Jung-gu C Housing Remodeling Corporation (hereinafter “instant construction”) and performed construction work from December 2016 to March 2017.

② The Defendant had F as the site manager at the instant construction site, and F was in charge of the early construction work on behalf of the Defendant as the site manager, and the Defendant was in charge of the early construction work on behalf of the Defendant. The materials are procured, and D are different.