운송료
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. 기초사실 갑 제1 내지 4호증, 을 제1호증의 각 기재에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, 피고는 2018. 5. 23. D으로부터 서울 강서구 E에 있는 “F 빌딩” 신축공사 현장에서 발생한 토사 운반 업무를 도급받은 사실, 피고는 그 무렵 원고에게 위 현장에서 나온 토사에 관하여 25톤 덤프트럭 한 대당 뻘 115,000원, 토사 75,000원으로 각 단가를 정하여 운반 업무를 하도급한 사실, 원고는 2019. 7. 17.경 피고에게 뻘 130,000원, 토사 80,000원으로 단가 인상을 요청하였고, 2019. 7. 18.부터 인상된 단가를 기초로 거래명세서를 작성하여 피고에게 제출한 사실, 원고는 2019. 3. 18.경 피고에게 미지급 운송료 36,457,000원의 지급을 내용증명 우편으로 독촉한 사실을 인정할 수 있다.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant: (a) accepted the Plaintiff’s request for the increase in the unit price of transport charges on July 17, 2019; (b) paid transport charges on the basis of the increased unit price until August 2019; (c) paid a total of KRW 36,457,00 among KRW 92,752,00,000; and (d) did not pay the remainder of KRW 36,457,00; and (b) the Defendant is obligated to pay the unpaid transport charges and its delay damages. (c) The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff would accept the Plaintiff’s request for the increase in the unit price, but did not agree on the increase in the unit price; (d) the Defendant did not eventually set the unit price at the place of the original order; and (e) the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the transport charges that was settled at the existing unit price from the place of the order.
Therefore, there is no unpaid transportation charge.
B. In the event of a change in the judgment contract, the claimant bears the burden of proof as to the change, and the plaintiff and the defendant in relation to the increase in the unit cost of the transport fee only with the statement of Nos. 1 to 4 of the plaintiff's submission.