beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 59,149,228 and its related costs to the Plaintiff are 5% per annum from June 25, 2020 to January 8, 2021.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. From November 14, 2014 to October 4, 2019, the Plaintiff supplied to the Defendant a multi-house with the content of the attached sheet delivery column, which appears to overlap with the plastic greenhouse greenhouse, as indicated in the same column, and the Defendant repaid the same amount to the Plaintiff as indicated in the same table receipt column, and the Defendant remains the unpaid amount of KRW 66,459,611 as of the closing date of pleadings.
B. On November 2017, the Defendant established CO2 4 units (1,800,000 won per unit) in a farming household located in Yeongdeungpo-gu around November 2017 at the Plaintiff’s request.
[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay damages in proportion to 7,200,000 won per annum under the Civil Act until January 8, 2021, which is the date of the judgment of this case, to the plaintiff, who is the person who is obligated to pay the plaintiff at KRW 66,459,611 of the unpaid amount of CO2 to the defendant (i.e., KRW 1,80,000 x 4), and the amount calculated by subtracting KRW 110,383 from the portion of the quality guarantee fee withdrawn at the fifth hearing of this case from the fifth hearing of this case, which is 59,149,228 won, and that the defendant's objection as to the existence and scope of the obligation of the defendant to pay the defendant to the defendant.
3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. As to this, the Defendant asserted that the amount of content, which was viewed as the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant around 2015, is at a discount of five million won per unit, and the Defendant paid part of the supplied amount as shown in the attached Table, is insufficient to recognize the Defendant’s above assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
B. The Defendant is subject to the statute of limitations for short-term extinction of three years for the claim for the content of the instant Bodoer. Therefore, the Plaintiff sent a certificate of content to the Defendant and implement the certificate.