용역비
Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) filed against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) KRW 207,592,00 on September 18, 2018 to September 16, 2019.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a company that operates facility security business, real estate consulting business, etc., and the Defendant is a reconstruction association established pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban and Residential Environments in order to implement reconstruction improvement projects (hereinafter “instant business”) within the area of 96,582.80 square meters in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju.
B. On February 22, 2016, the Defendant published a bidding notice and concluded a service contract with a view to selecting a business operator, such as immigration control and crime prevention services.
2) Three companies, including the Plaintiff, participated in the above tender on March 2016. The Plaintiff’s bid price was KRW 1,887,200,000 (Additional No. 3) and the detailed estimate and calculation details thereof (hereinafter “the detailed estimate of this case”) are as listed in attached Table 1 re-approval.
3) On April 15, 2016, the Defendant selected the Plaintiff who participated at the lowest price as a provider of immigration management and crime prevention services. On April 15, 2016, the Defendant entered into a contract on the said services (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Plaintiff, and the main contents are as shown in attached Table 2.
(c)
1) The Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 1,698,480,000 (Additional Tax Table) except for KRW 188,720,000 (10%, and the Additional Tax Table) that was to be paid at 100% of the rate of duty for resettlement management and crime prevention under the instant contract.
2) Around September 17, 2018, the Plaintiff submitted a written report on the duty of immigration management to the Defendant, and the Defendant (the president D) prepared a written confirmation of the completion of the service to the Plaintiff on the same day.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy Facts, Gap 1, 2, 4, 13 evidence, Eul 1, 6, 7 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The detailed estimate of this case attached to the plaintiff's response letter submitted by the plaintiff is only submitted for the purpose of calculating the unit price for convenience in the bidding process, and thus the above detailed estimate became the content of the contract of this case.
The plaintiff can not be seen as the case.