공사대금
1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) regarding the principal lawsuit are dismissed.
2. The judgment of the court of first instance is in the process of judgment.
1. The reasoning of this court’s judgment citing the judgment of the first instance is 3.B. of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance.
1) Paragraph 1, 3, and 4 are the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the completion thereof as follows. As such, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay compensation for delay to the Defendant for the delayed period of construction work. As such, even if the completion of the construction work was delayed, the Plaintiff asserted that, under the instant contract, the construction period was within the period from June 2, 2013 to March 31, 2014, the rate of compensation for delay was set at 1/1,00 per day, the date of completion as the date of completion inspection, the Defendant received completion inspection on December 28, 2015, and the fact that the construction work in this case was completed on December 28, 2015. As such, the Plaintiff’s delayed completion of the construction work in this case, even if there were no special circumstances, may not be considered as the cause attributable to the Plaintiff’s delayed completion of the construction work before the construction site, and thus, the Plaintiff’s delayed completion of the construction work cannot be considered as the cause attributable to the change.
Where the contractor suspends the construction without completing the construction within the deadline for completion and the completion of the construction is delayed as a result of the termination of the contract, the compensation for delay shall be from the date of completion.