beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 31,466,810 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and its related amount from September 22, 2012 to September 11, 2013.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On October 21, 201, after receiving a supply of and demand for C Construction, the Defendant subcontracted the construction of reinforced concrete among the above construction works (hereinafter “instant subcontract agreement”) to the Plaintiff, who carries out a reinforced concrete project, etc. in the 756 New-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Gyeong-gun, Seoul, for the construction of the instant subcontract. The main contents of the instant subcontract agreement are as follows.
Construction price: 29,570,000 won (including value-added tax): 0.1% from October 24, 201 to January 31, 2012:
B. On March 22, 2012, the Defendant drafted a subcontract agreement in the form of the Plaintiff, 1, and 2, in order to report the instant subcontract contract to Gosung-gun, and the main contents of the said contract are as follows.
1) The date of the first subcontract contract: the period of construction of KRW 193,373,60 (including value-added tax): From November 2, 2011 to January 11, 2012: the rate of compensation for delay: 0.1% on the contract date of the second subcontract contract: the contract date on March 5, 2012: the contract date on March 5, 2012: the period of construction of KRW 369,556,00 (including value-added tax): From November 2, 2011 to April 20, 2012: 0.1%;
C. On March 22, 2012, the Defendant drafted a written confirmation confirming that the actual construction cost of the instant subcontract contract (hereinafter “instant construction cost”) between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff is KRW 29,570,000,00 (hereinafter “instant written confirmation”). D.
When the subcontracted work in this case was interrupted due to the Plaintiff’s failure to pay personnel expenses, material expenses, etc., the Defendant extended the completion period from January 31, 2012 to April 20, 2012 to the Plaintiff.
E. Nevertheless, the Plaintiff did not resume the subcontracted project of this case, and the Defendant urged the Plaintiff to resume the subcontracted project of this case on May 1, 2012, by paying personnel expenses and material expenses, etc., but the Plaintiff still did not comply with such demand.