beta
(영문) 수원지방법원안양지원 2019.10.11 2018가단113124

공사대금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 110,337,474 as well as 5% per annum from January 1, 2019 to October 11, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. On June 12, 2017, the Plaintiff newly constructed a tombstone and a Hasium (hereinafter “instant vinyl”) on the ground of the 6,523 square meters wide above the Defendant’s 113,443,020 square meters and the construction cost was based on the amount indicated in the Party A’s Evidence No. 3 (Contract Standard Contract) and the Party A’s Evidence No. 4 (Tax Invoice) instead of the amount indicated in the said Evidence.

(The instant construction contract was concluded (hereinafter “instant construction contract”). (The instant construction contract was concluded in 81,02,290 only 32,420,730 won, excluding value-added tax).

B. However, the Plaintiff used used double pipe pipes used in the instant plastic pipe located in D at the time of filtering the instant plastic pipe (hereinafter “instant plastic pipe”) to construct the instant plastic pipe using the pipe around July 20, 2017, and then handed over the instant plastic pipe to the Defendant around that time.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The allegations by the parties and their determination

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) was found to have used the second pipe in constructing the instant vinyl, but only used part of the instant vinyl 1,170, and the price difference between the second pipe 1,170 and the new pipe 1,170 is merely a maximum of 1,569,250 won.

B) Therefore, in light of the size of the plastic houses located D at the time when the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the remainder after deducting the above KRW 1,569,250 from the construction cost under the instant construction contract, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the remainder and the delay damages therefrom. (ii) In light of the size of the plastic houses located D at the time when the Plaintiff asserted, the quantity of the intermediate pipe used by the Plaintiff for the new construction of the instant plastic houses exceeds 1,170, while the value of the steel pipe used by the Plaintiff was merely 1/2 through 1/3 of the new pipe price).