beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 46,757,024 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from November 18, 2016 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. The following facts may be acknowledged in light of the evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, 3-1, 3-2, 4-1, 2, 5-1, 5-2, 6-1 through 13, 7, 8-1 through 6, 9, 10, 10-1 through 3, 7, 8-1 through 8-4, 8-1 through 4, 5-1, 5-2, 6-1, 6-1 through 13, 7, 10, 10-1 through 1-3, 7, 8-1 through 4, and 5-1 through 4 of the witness D's testimony, and there is no counter-proof:
On October 15, 2012, the Defendant received a subcontract for the installation of the F Project from Nonparty E Co., Ltd.; and around December 24, 2012, the Defendant provided a sub-subcontract to Nonparty G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) for the construction and fire-fighting equipment, pipeline installation works, etc. during the foregoing construction work.
B. The Plaintiff entered into a supply contract with G, from January 2013 to April 2013, and supplied materials, such as Do joint 28 million won, such as Do joint 28 million won. Since G did not pay the price of KRW 10 million, the supply was suspended after April 2013.
C. Around August 20, 2013, the Plaintiff supplied the materials equivalent to KRW 56,757,026 ( KRW 34,762,200, KRW 21,94,826) to the Plaintiff, beginning with the Plaintiff’s director H, etc. of the Defendant Company and the Plaintiff’s actual manager D, etc. after the completion of the said materials at the construction site from October 25, 2013.
However, in the above supply transaction, the order form or acceptance form was prepared in the name of the employee of the defendant such as the head of the defendant company's site, and the plaintiff issued the transaction statement under the name of the defendant company, but the tax invoice was issued by the person who
E. On October 18, 2013, the Defendant received a written request for direct payment under the name of G and paid KRW 10 million out of the above material price to the Plaintiff, but the Defendant also did not pay the other price to the Plaintiff.
F. Around May 2014, the Plaintiff attached a claim for the said re-subcontracted construction cost to the Defendant with the claim for the said material price as the preserved claim, and thereafter, attached the claim against G.