공사대금
1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.
The defendant.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in the construction industry under the trade name of “G”.
On May 2014, the Defendant is a construction company that received a contract for construction cost of KRW 1,346,370,497 from the Ulsan E High School Office of Education (hereinafter referred to as the “instant extension company”) for the construction work at KRW 1,346,370,497.
B. On December 7, 2015, the Defendant’s trade name was changed from “Stock Company B” to “H”, and from May 25, 2016 to “F”.
C. At the time of May 16, 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract for the execution of the responsibility of the head of the on-site office (hereinafter “instant contract for the execution of responsibility”) with C, who was the head of the on-site office, for the instant extension work, to assume responsibility within the construction amount and complete the said construction work as the head of the on-site office.
At the time, the construction period was from May 12, 2014 to January 6, 2015, and the cost of the responsible construction was set at KRW 1 billion.
Around May 2014, according to the instant contract for the construction of responsibility, C concluded a construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) with the Plaintiff, under which the Plaintiff would contract the business entity’s body steel works (hereinafter “instant construction works”) among the instant construction works. The Plaintiff completed the instant construction project from around that time to January 2015.
E. Meanwhile, on October 24, 2014, the Plaintiff, with respect to the instant construction project, prepared and displayed a written estimate of KRW 48,680,200 (excluding value-added tax) in total, and agreed to reduce the said construction cost to KRW 47,50,000 (excluding value-added tax) through consultation with C on October 27, 2014.
Accordingly, on October 30, 2014, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of KRW 52,250,000 (i.e., value of KRW 47,50,000 value-added tax of KRW 47,50,000).
F. On January 9, 2015, the Plaintiff received KRW 28,000,000 from the Defendant out of the said construction price.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 5 and 7 shall be numbered.