공사대금
1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.
Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) with KRW 10,256,400 and KRW 400.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. On July 2, 2014, the Plaintiff concluded a construction contract that newly constructs two-story housing units in Jeonnam-do C (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) with the Defendant, and concluded the object completed under the instant construction contract (hereinafter “instant housing”).
The parts related to this case among the contents of the instant construction contract are as follows:
Table: Article 1 (Opening of Construction Period) of the Terms and Conditions of the instant Construction Contract, < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 2542, Jul. 7, 2014; Presidential Decree No. 25704, Sep. 12, 2014>
1. 154,00,000 won (in addition to value-added tax), the first 15,40,000 won (in the case of release of materials), the second 25,000,000 won (in the case of release of materials), the third 20,000 won (in the case of release of materials), the fourth 39,60,000 won (in the case of a structural work), the fifth 47,00,000 won (in the case of a structural work), the sixth 7,00,000 won (in the case of a structural work), the sixth 6th 7,00,000 won; and
2. A (Defendant) shall not delay payment without good cause in relation to the payment of the price for the work under the preceding paragraph, and in the event of delay, the unpaid amount shall be paid at 12% interest per annum from the day following the date of payment to the date of full payment.
Additional construction cost must be paid in advance.
Article 6 (Performance Delay)
1. Eul (Plaintiff) shall pay to Gap an amount equivalent to one-one thousands00 of the construction cost per delay day when the completion of construction works is not completed within the deadline, and the total daily amount per delay day shall not exceed ten percent of the total construction cost;
B. The Defendant paid KRW 152,400,000 to the Plaintiff out of the instant construction cost, and obtained permission for the completion of the instant house on February 5, 2015.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 7 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the main claim
A. 1) The Plaintiff did not receive value-added tax equivalent to 10% stated in the instant construction contract form from the Defendant.
There is no separate argument in the appellate court.