beta
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.12.06 2016가단25378

공사대금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 4,436,660 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from October 12, 2015 to December 6, 2017, and the following.

Reasons

1. On August 15, 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract on the modification of the content of the construction work for Ulsan-gun B (hereinafter “instant construction”) with the Plaintiff at KRW 345 million (the date of payment at issue of the completion certificate and the time of payment of the defect bond), the construction period from August 15, 2014 to August 10, 2015, and the delayed payment rate of KRW 0.1%.

The Defendant obtained approval for the use of the instant building on October 12, 2015.

The remainder of the construction cost that the Defendant did not pay to the Plaintiff is KRW 9,266,660.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 7 evidence, Eul 2 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder construction cost under the instant construction contract to the Plaintiff as KRW 9,266,660.

B. On October 12, 2015, the Defendant’s assertion of set-off 1) The Plaintiff shall pay 21,735,000 won (i.e., KRW 345,500,000 x 0.1% x 63 days) with compensation for delay after delay of the time limit for completion of the instant construction project. Since the Plaintiff had failed to construct the instant construction project, 2,960,00 won for the non-construction portion, since there were many defects, such as the quantity of drain water, etc., in the instant construction project executed by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff shall pay 25,375,319,00 won to the Defendant with compensation for delay. As such, the Plaintiff received additional construction cost from the Defendant after arbitrarily expanding the underground warehouse and the interior without the Defendant’s consent, the additional construction cost should be refunded. Therefore, the remainder of the construction price compensation against the Plaintiff, such as the Plaintiff, etc., is not considered to have been paid in the set-off against the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff.

The criteria for distinguishing between the incomplete completion and defect of a new building construction work shall be the Do.