beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 82,901,072 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from October 31, 2013 to February 3, 2015.
Reasons
1. The relevant Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur who designs the automobile parts and manufactures gold, etc. under the trade name of “B,” and the Defendant is a company with the aim of manufacturing precision equipment.
The plaintiff has produced and supplied the gold paper to the defendant upon request of the defendant for the production of the gold paper.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, purport of whole pleading
2. Determination:
A. 1) According to each of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 6 (including separate numbers), the Plaintiff requested production and correction of the amount equivalent to KRW 358,70,000 from January 201 to September 201, 201, after receiving a contract for production and correction of the amount equivalent to KRW 358,70,000 from the Defendant, and then being supplied to the Defendant. The Plaintiff asserted that the production cost was not paid. 2) According to each of the above evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 6 (including separate numbers), the Plaintiff requested production and correction of the amount of gold equivalent to KRW 358,70,000 from the Defendant from the date of 2010 to the date of 2011, the Plaintiff may be recognized as having produced and supplied the gold form to the Defendant according to the above production request, and the fact that the unpaid portion of the production cost was a cause for 82,901,072 between the parties.
(A) The Defendant: (a) made a confession of the fact that the said confession was not paid, but revoked in the preparatory brief, etc. dated May 9, 2014 and August 7, 2014; (b) however, there is not any sufficient evidence to acknowledge that the confession was contrary to the truth and due to mistake; and (c) there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the confession was made due to mistake; and (d) on the other hand, the said confession was revoked. On the other hand, the Plaintiff supplied goods exceeding the said amount only by the testimony of the witness C, and the statement of the witness C provided goods to the Defendant.
It is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant was not paid the amount exceeding KRW 82,901,072 from the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant’s payment to the Plaintiff amounting to KRW 82,901,072 and its payment.