공사대금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The following facts leading to the instant dispute may be acknowledged if there is no dispute between the parties, or if the whole purport of the pleadings is added to each description of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including each number).
On June 19, 2014, the Defendant: (a) concluded a contract with the Plaintiff for the construction of a new house (hereinafter “instant house”) on the land (hereinafter “instant construction”) on the land (hereinafter “instant construction”) located on the land (hereinafter “instant construction”) for the construction cost of KRW 90,00,000; and (b) the construction period of KRW 30,00, Sept. 30, 2014.
B. During the Plaintiff’s process of construction under the said contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed that KRW 20,000 shall perform additional construction costs and the total construction cost shall be KRW 110,000,000,000, while performing the said construction work.
C. On October 27, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction and additional construction work.
From June 19, 2014 to October 24, 2014, the Defendant paid the construction price of KRW 93,000,000 to the Plaintiff.
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The Plaintiff asserts that the instant construction project and the Roof Blue Fireproof construction were carried out in accordance with the contract with the Defendant, and sought payment of the construction cost of KRW 23,210,000 in total to the Defendant.
B. According to the facts acknowledged earlier, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 110,00,000, and the Defendant pays KRW 93,000,000 among them, so the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid construction cost of KRW 17,00,000 ( KRW 110,000,000-93,000) and damages for delay from the date of delivery of the original copy of the instant payment order as sought by the Plaintiff after the completion of the construction.
C. Since there is no evidence to prove that the construction exceeding the above scope recognized by the Plaintiff was carried out by the Defendant under a contract, the Plaintiff’s claim exceeding the above scope of recognition is without merit.
3. Judgment on the defendant's defense
A. The cost of repairing the contents of the defect in the finding of facts.