beta
(영문) 청주지방법원충주지원 2016.10.05 2016가단2706

공사대금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 116,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from April 22, 2016 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a contractor who entered into a contract for construction works in the amount of KRW 1,500,000 with respect to Jincheon-gun C Corporation in the year 2013 (mutual name: B) (Additional tax separately).

On October 28, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with the Defendant to pay the advance payment of KRW 80,000,000,000, out of the total construction cost of KRW 800,000,00 (Additional dues) between the Plaintiff and the said Corporation (hereinafter “instant Corporation”), and to pay the progress payment within 15 days after the end of each month.

B. The Plaintiff claimed that the Defendant pay KRW 5,000,000 on November 1, 2013, and KRW 143,000,000 on December 31, 2013. The Plaintiff received only KRW 82,00,000 on November 7, 2013 from the Defendant until then, as well as KRW 20,00,000 on March 27, 2014, and KRW 5,000 on June 16, 2014, and KRW 7,000,000 on July 222, 2014.

C. The instant construction is suspended since 2014 to the present date.

[Reasons for Recognition] Items A, 1, 2, 3, and Nos. 1, 2, and 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 4, 5, and 6, the plaintiff issued a tax invoice of KRW 5,000,000 (including value-added tax) on November 1, 2013, and a tax invoice of KRW 143,00,000 (including value-added tax) on December 31, 2013, and the plaintiff paid a total of KRW 180,00,000 from October 31, 2013 to January 2014.

In addition, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff received a total of KRW 82,00,000 from the Defendant.

According to this, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the remainder of 116,00,000,000 won including the above construction cost of KRW 18,00,000 and the surcharge of KRW 18,000,000, except for the above construction cost of KRW 198,000,000 and the surcharge of delay.

The Seoul Central District Court did not confirm the completed portion by the ordering person, as alleged by the defendant, and against A who is the contractor of the above work.