beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.09.23 2014나40517

물품대금

Text

1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The defendant-Counterclaim plaintiff's counterclaim brought at the trial.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 3, 2012, the Defendant entered into a subcontract with the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant subcontract”) on April 3, 2012, which covers construction cost of KRW 212,00,00 with respect to the instant construction site for new urban residential housing (hereinafter “instant construction”). Of the construction cost, the said construction cost was KRW 130,85,000.

B. On April 5, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a supply contract with the Defendant as follows (hereinafter “instant supply contract”) and supplied the Defendant with the third day.

Delivery Contract

1. On-site name: Sce comprehensive mining construction A site;

2. Field address: Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government A.

3. Amount: 124,917,000 won (excluding value-added tax);

4. Settlement terms: The same conditions for the settlement of detailed mining comprehensive construction.

5. The above quantities should be borne by the Plaintiff in addition to the non-exclusive Lossss and A/S materials in the ordered quantities.

C. From March 31, 2012 to November 29, 2012, the Defendant issued a tax invoice of KRW 137,408,70 (including value-added tax) on four occasions from the Plaintiff, and paid to the Plaintiff KRW 120 million in total,00,000,000,000 for the amount of goods on April 12, 2012, and KRW 40,000 on May 11, 2012, and KRW 30 million on May 31, 2012.

Meanwhile, the Defendant filed a lawsuit for the payment of construction cost as Seoul Central District Court 201Gahap76350 on Oct. 11, 2013, 2013, referring to the judgment referring to KRW 112,467,283 (=149,000 - KRW 36,532,717), which is the remainder of the damage claim in lieu of defect repair from the unpaid construction cost, as the Defendant received KRW 63 million total of KRW 63 million on July 20, 2012, and failed to receive the remainder of the construction cost, and the Defendant filed a lawsuit for the payment of construction cost as the Seoul Central District Court 2012Gahap76350 (Seoul High Court 2013 or 20245). On April 29, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] There is no dispute.