공사대금
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.
The defendant.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the basic facts is as follows: “A construction contract was concluded” in Part 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter “the instant construction contract”); “Plaintiff” in Part 10 as “C”; “A August 16, 2011”; “1,840,000 won” in Part 12 as “ August 16, 2010”; and “11,840,000 won” in the same part as “12,840,000 won” in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act; and therefore, it is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The reasoning of the court’s explanation on this part of the instant defense is as stated in Paragraph 2 of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
3. Judgment on the merits
A. (1) According to the above facts, C is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above acquisition amount of KRW 60,840,000,000 and the delay damages for the acquisition of part of the claim for the remainder of the construction of this case by completing the construction of this case. Thus, C is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above acquisition amount of KRW 60,000,000 and the delay damages for the remainder of the construction of this case, barring any special circumstance.
(2) As to this, the Defendant asserted that the party who entered into the instant construction contract is not C, and therefore, the Defendant was aware of the fact that C lent a construction license to do the instant construction contract, and the fact that C agreed to pay the remainder of the construction contract after the completion of the instant construction project is identical to that as seen earlier, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
B. (1) The judgment of the defendant's assertion (1) since there are defects such as non-construction and erroneous construction in the building of this case alleged by the defendant, C is the defendant totaling KRW 128,571,00,000 in lieu of the defect repair in the first instance court, the damage compensation in lieu of the defect repair is totaling 136,322.