장비사용료
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 920,00 and shall pay to the Plaintiff the full payment from February 10, 2015.
1. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. From July 12, 2014 to August 11, 2014, the Plaintiff leased two working equipment to the Defendant with respect to the instant construction work (hereinafter “instant construction”).
The above equipment rental fee is KRW 1,320,000.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of KRW 920,00,000, excluding the remainder of KRW 400,000,000, which the Plaintiff was paid to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances (i.e., KRW 1,320,000 - KRW 400,000) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from February 10, 2015 to the date of full payment.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. As to the Defendant’s assertion, on November 7, 2014, the Defendant agreed from the Plaintiff and the Defendant, which subcontracted the instant construction to the Defendant, that the Plaintiff would pay the remainder of equipment rental fees to the Defendant at the same time, and did not make a re-claim, and accordingly, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant was extinguished.
B. According to the evidence No. 5, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, on November 7, 2014, may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendant made a written consent to the direct payment of the remainder of the equipment rental fee claims of the Plaintiff as follows. Until July 12, 2014 through August 11, 2014, the Plaintiff agreed that KRW 920,000 remaining as attempted on November 7, 2014, out of the cost of the work equipment used by the Defendant at the site of the instant construction site, shall be directly treated as a direct payment to the Plaintiff. The written consent to the direct payment of the outstanding amount of the work expense shall have the effect of the credit transfer and takeover contract, and may not be re-requested to the Defendant later. The Plaintiff’s consent to the direct payment of the outstanding amount of the work expense shall be consistent with the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.