공사대금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On December 9, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant, on the following grounds: (a) the construction cost of KRW 500,000 for the Saturdays of the factory site A and two lots (hereinafter referred to as the “instant Saturdays”) on the following grounds: (b) the Plaintiff paid KRW 27,50,000 to the Plaintiff on January 29, 2015 as the price for the construction work; or (c) the fact that the Defendant paid KRW 27,50,000 to the Plaintiff on January 29, 2015 is either disputed between the parties or recognized by the description in subparagraphs A through 9.
2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant paid only KRW 27.5 million out of the above construction price to the plaintiff, regardless of the name of KRW 110,026,010 for the construction price of the land of this case. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant sought payment for the remaining construction price against the defendant.
However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to deem that the construction cost of the instant earth and sand executed by the Plaintiff reaches KRW 110,026,010, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it (the Plaintiff does not take any action, such as filing an application for appraisal, after the attorney’s right to attorney was extinguished). Rather, according to the evidence No. B No. 1, the Plaintiff was fully paid the construction cost for the portion of the construction work executed until January 29, 2015 when the Plaintiff took out a loan from the agricultural cooperative in the Republic of Korea as collateral for the land A, etc., a landowner, in the course of the Plaintiff’s taking out a loan from the agricultural cooperative in the Republic of Korea as collateral.
It is only recognized that “a certificate is prepared and submitted.”
3. In conclusion, the claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.