beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 22,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 20% per annum from May 12, 2015 to September 30, 2015.
Reasons
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence No. 1, No. 2, and No. 1.
On May 30, 2014, the Defendant entered into a subcontract with the Dong Mine Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Dong Mine Construction”) to receive subcontract payment of KRW 1,339,80,000 (including value-added tax) and the construction period from May 30, 2014 to December 31, 2014. On September 4, 2014, the Defendant entered into a subcontract to change the construction amount to KRW 1,357,400,00 (including value-added tax).
B. On June 17, 2014, the Plaintiff, as the Defendant, submitted a written estimate of the estimated amount of KRW 55,000,000 (excluding value-added tax) with respect to the waterproof Works among the instant structures (hereinafter “the instant waterproof Works”), to the addressee, and cut off while performing the instant waterproof work.
C. On July 31, 2014, the Plaintiff issued an electronic tax invoice of KRW 22,00,000 (including value-added tax) as a waterproof construction for products with the Defendant supplied.
2. Summary of the parties’ assertion
A. The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the cost of waterproof Construction Work 22,00,000 won (including value-added tax) and damages for delay, inasmuch as (i) the Plaintiff was under construction by re-subcontracted and sub-subcontracted the instant waterproof Construction Work from the Defendant.
The CD, which directed the Plaintiff, is an employee of the Defendant, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the instant waterproof construction cost to the Plaintiff. Family Affairs D, as alleged by the Defendant, is not the Defendant’s employee, but the Defendant is obligated to pay the instant waterproof construction cost to the Plaintiff on the responsibility of the nominal lender under Article 24 of the Commercial Act
B. The defendant is under construction of the structure of this case.