beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.14 2017가단11757

공사대금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 101,970,000 per annum for the Plaintiff and six percent per annum from November 26, 2016 to January 20, 2017.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 3, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant to perform the construction works of machinery and fire-fighting parts among the construction works of the cultural assembly facilities in Pyeongtaek-si Dong-dong with a fixed period from December 3, 2015 to February 28, 2016, with a fixed price of KRW 90,000,000 for each contract (excluding value-added tax).

(hereinafter, each of the above construction works and contracts is “the instant construction works” and “the instant construction contract”). (b)

After completion of the instant construction work, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to pay KRW 90,000,000 for the original contract price and KRW 2,700,000 for the additional construction cost.

C. Accordingly, between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff on November 1, 2016, the Defendant confirmed that the final construction cost under the instant construction contract was KRW 101,970,00 (including KRW 90,000,000 x 1.1, and value-added tax) and agreed to pay the said amount to the Plaintiff by the 25th of the same month (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

2) The grounds for the appeal Nos. 1 through 3 and the grounds for the appeal No. 1 to 3

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above KRW 101,970,000 and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum as stipulated in the Commercial Act from November 26, 2016 to January 20, 2017, which is the day following the due date under the agreement of this case, the delivery date of a copy of the application for the payment order of this case, and 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the day of full payment.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified and acceptable.