beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 130,875,467 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 6% from January 3, 2015 to August 27, 2015.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On March 24, 2014, the Defendant was awarded a contract on December 18, 2014, setting the “B fire fighting construction” from the Seoul Regional Headquarters of the Korea Airports Corporation (hereinafter “instant construction”) as the construction cost of KRW 850,974,930 (amended by KRW 93,071,822, Nov. 17, 2014) and the completion date on December 18, 2014.
B. On May 7, 2014, the Plaintiff concluded a subcontract (hereinafter “instant subcontract”) with respect to the fire-fighting machinery works among the fire-fighting works of the instant construction works (hereinafter “instant subcontracted works”) by setting the construction period from March 14, 2014 to December 18, 2014; and the construction cost of KRW 39 million (excluding value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) as KRW 39 million.
C. After that, the Plaintiff completed the subcontracted project of this case, and issued a tax invoice to the Defendant on January 2, 2015, and filed a claim for construction payment. The Defendant denied the conclusion of the subcontract agreement with the Plaintiff and did not comply therewith.
【In the absence of a dispute over a part of the grounds for recognition, evidence Nos. 4-1 through 3, evidence No. 6, each entry of evidence Nos. 3 and 5, witness C’s testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion as the Defendant’s employee entered into the instant subcontract with C, and entered into a modified contract with the Defendant to increase the construction price of KRW 435,550,00 on November 10, 2014, and then paid a total of KRW 298,124,533 from the Defendant, or received the Plaintiff’s material business operator’s direct payment. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the subcontracted project (i.e., KRW 435,50,500 value-added tax 43,55,000 value-added tax 43,55,000 value-added tax 45,00,000 value-added tax - 298,124,533) and damages for delay.
Even if C did not have the authority to conclude the subcontract of this case on behalf of the Defendant, the Defendant delegated C with the authority to execute the subcontract of this case, and the Defendant’s employees and employees.