beta
Text
1. As to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s KRW 12,00,000 and KRW 4,016,00 among them, the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant) from May 25, 2013.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 2012, the Plaintiff subcontracted the instant waterproof construction work (hereinafter “instant waterproof construction”) to the Defendant and executed the instant waterproof construction work in a period of KRW 24,200,00,00 among the new construction works of the Mastan-dong 41-5, 41-6 Blue-dong (hereinafter “instant building”).
B. However, the Defendant paid KRW 12.2 million of the above construction cost, and the remainder is refusing the payment on the ground of defects in the waterproof Construction Work.
[Ground for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4
2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the claim of the principal lawsuit, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 12 million (=20 million - 12 million).
The plaintiff claims for the payment of damages for delay as to the total amount above.
If there is a defect in the object completed in the contract for work, the contractor may claim for the repair of the defect against the contractor and may claim damages in lieu of or together with the repair of the defect. These claims are in the simultaneous performance relationship with the contractor's contract price claim.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Da31914 Decided October 11, 2007). However, as seen in paragraph (3) below, it can be known that water leakage occurred due to the defect in the waterproof construction of this case, and that the cost of repair would be KRW 7,984,000 as remuneration cost. As to the part corresponding to the defect in the construction cost of this case, there is no delay liability.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated by applying the respective ratio of 6% under the Commercial Act from May 25, 2013 to December 11, 2014, which is the date following the day when the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the Defendant with respect to KRW 12 million and its KRW 4,016,00 among them (i.e., KRW 12 million - KRW 7,984,000).