공사대금 등
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 63,30,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from June 28, 2017 to the day of complete payment.
Facts of recognition
The following facts are either a dispute between the parties, or a statement in Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including a serial number), a witness C's testimony and the overall purport of oral arguments, or a record.
On November 2013, the Plaintiff contracted the Defendant with the installation of solar power infrastructure (hereinafter “instant construction”) on his own house located in YY-si.
B. On November 11, 2013, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant KRW 15,00,000,000 in total, and KRW 5,000,000 on May 16, 2014, and KRW 15,00,000 on July 25, 2014.
C. On April 25, 2018, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to rescind the instant First Construction Contract on the ground that the Defendant did not perform the instant First Construction Project, and the said declaration of intent reached the Defendant on April 26, 2018.
Meanwhile, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 4,300,000 to the Defendant on September 16, 2014, KRW 1,800,000 on September 27, 2014, and KRW 500,000 on November 19, 2014.
E. Around July 2015, the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for the production and installation work of a foundation for a signboard parking lot (hereinafter “instant 2 construction”) among the construction work of signboards on the side of a road in E by the Defendant.
F. In addition, around October 2015, the Plaintiff received a subcontract from the Defendant for the part of the steel structure (hereinafter “instant third construction”) among the new construction works of the building on the F of the race-si, Sejong-si (hereinafter “instant third construction”) at the contract price of KRW 40,000,000.
2. Determination on the claim for return of the first construction cost of this case
A. The defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case filed by the plaintiff is unlawful, since the defendant's judgment on the main defense of this case is not the plaintiff but G corporation.
However, in the performance suit, since the plaintiff's standing to sue is determined by the plaintiff's claim itself, a person who claims his/her right to claim performance has standing to sue, and a person who claims as the obligor has standing to sue.