하자보수비 등
1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.
2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is entitled to KRW 40,94,779 against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).
A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On March 7, 2019, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a contract with the Defendant for the construction of a general agricultural warehouse and a low temperature warehouse (hereinafter “instant construction”).
B. Around March 7, 2019, the Defendant presented a written estimate to the Plaintiff, stating a sum of KRW 224,700,000,000, and the said written estimate 1 and two pages contain the phrase “value-added tax separate” in the same text.
The Plaintiff and the Defendant stated the phrase “Reduction of KRW 220,00,000 (final decision)” at the bottom of the aggregate amount of written estimates.
C. Around March 7, 2019, a contract agreement was made between the Plaintiff and the Defendant regarding the instant construction.
In the instant construction contract, the construction period is from March 16, 2019 to June 15, 2019; the rate of compensation for delay is 0.03%; and the construction amount is 220,000,000 won; however, there is no provision on whether value-added tax is included in the said construction amount, or whether value-added tax is separate.
On May 29, 2019, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a Kakao Stockholm message stating that “All construction works have been completed and completed,” along with the pictures of the newly built warehouse.
On July 2, 2019, the Plaintiff submitted an application for approval of the use of a newly built warehouse to the Hamyeong-gun. However, on July 23, 2019, the Hamyeong-gun demanded the Plaintiff to supplement due to the reason that the closing of a low temperature warehouse inside and outside of the original design differs from the original design. The Plaintiff failed to obtain approval of the use of the newly built warehouse.
E. The Defendant voluntarily acknowledges that the Plaintiff received KRW 170,000,000 from the Plaintiff’s payment of the construction cost.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 3, Eul evidence 8, and fact-finding with the head of Pyeongtaek-gun of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Monetary claims against the plaintiff against the defendant;
A. The damage claim No. 4 in lieu of the defect repair is proved.