beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On June 29, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) from the Defendant on June 29, 2015, the construction cost of KRW 1,178,472,00 for the construction cost; and (b) from June 30, 2015 to December 26, 2015 for the construction period of KRW 1,178,472,00 for the construction cost; (c) the rate of liquidated damages for delay was set at 0.1%.
B. Around September 23, 2015, the Plaintiff obtained permission from Cheongdo-gun to occupy and use a river for Dasancheon and Docheon as a result of the instant construction project, and obtained permission to occupy and use a river for Yancheon from the Si of the Gu, on October 14, 2015.
C. Around December 22, 2015, the Plaintiff issued to the Defendant a written consent for the payment of liquidated damages, for which the deadline for completion is December 26, 2015, and the rate of liquidated damages is 0.1%.
The Plaintiff obtained approval for completion of the instant construction work around February 26, 2016.
E. On February 26, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a modified agreement on the content of the contract that changes the contract amount to KRW 1,118,288,000 on the basis of the actual quantity as at the time of completion.
F. Around March 2016, the Defendant paid KRW 57,93,610 for delay penalty [1,073,956,00 (the amount deducted pursuant to Article 25(2) of the General Conditions of the Construction Contract at KRW 44,332,00 - the amount deducted pursuant to Article 25(2) of the General Conditions of the Construction Contract at KRW 44,332,00] x 54 days (60 days for delay - 60 days - 0.01] x 1,118,28,000 for delay penalty of KRW 57,93,610 for delay calculated by deducting KRW 57,93,610 for delay penalty of KRW 1,06,294,390 for delay.
[Grounds for Recognition: Evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings]
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is obligated to deliver the land for construction after obtaining permission to occupy and use a river in accordance with the general terms and conditions of the instant construction contract. As such, the Defendant cannot impose penalty for delay on the construction period delayed due to the procedures for permission to occupy and use a river, and even if the Plaintiff agreed on the change in the volume of construction and the construction amount on February 26, 2016, he/she filed an agreement with the Plaintiff on