beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) 5% per annum from January 1, 2015 to July 8, 2015; and (b) from July 9, 2015 to Plaintiff A’s KRW 23,676,280.
Reasons
1. The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of Gap's summary of the case, Gap's evidence Nos. 6, 13, 39, 44, 45, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 and 7, and the purport of the whole arguments.
① On May 30, 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Dong Mine Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Dong Mine Construction”) under which the Defendant entered into a contract to supply and demand drainage structure works (hereinafter “instant construction”) from Dong Mine Construction to KRW 1,339,80,000 of the construction amount, and the construction period from May 30, 2014 to December 31, 2014. On September 4, 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract to change the construction amount to KRW 1,357,40,000 of the construction amount.
② On March 4, 2015, at the time of filing a lawsuit against the Defendant for the payment of KRW 300 million out of the construction price in this case by the Gwangju District Court 2015Gahap309, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on March 4, 2015, the Defendant filed a lawsuit for the payment of KRW 300 million among the construction price in this case, and the Defendant filed a lawsuit for the payment of materials and goods at the construction site in this case and for the provision of labor services with the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant”) of the Changwon District Court 2015Kadan1782 (A6), the Defendant filed a lawsuit for the payment against the Defendant at the construction site in this case, Masan District Court 2015da5468, 7426 (A39,44), the Gwangju District Court 2015Gadan53 (A13), the Gwangju District Court 2015Gadan3412 [7, the appellate court 2015Na8021 (A
The summary of the claim: The defendant asserts that the plaintiff A supplied goods, such as connected pin, and that the plaintiff B leased a sculf, and that the defendant claimed the payment of the price for the goods or the fee for the use of the goods, since the plaintiff entered into a contract with D, and received the payment from D, it is merely that D bears the obligation to pay the price for the goods or the fee for the use of the goods.
2. 판 단 인정사실 : ▷갑 1~50호증(가지번호 포함)의 각 기재, 증인 D의 일부 증언을 종합하면, 원고들이 피고의 E를 통하여 물품공급 또는 건설기계임대차계약을 체결하고 D은 이 사건 공사의 현장팀장 역할을 하면서 그...