beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. From August 26, 2016 to March 25, 2017, the Plaintiff supplied ready-mixed to the Defendant at the site of the unmanned telecom Construction Project (hereinafter “instant construction”) located in Dasan-si (hereinafter “instant construction”) and the Defendant did not pay KRW 9,860,000 to the present day. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 9,860,000 and damages for delay to the Plaintiff.
B. On July 4, 2016, the Defendant, the owner of the instant construction, contracted the instant construction to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”), and D entered into a supply contract directly with the Plaintiff, and the Defendant completed the payment of the instant construction cost in D, and thus, the Defendant, not the Defendant, should pay D Co., Ltd. to the Plaintiff.
2. As long as the formation of a disposal document is recognized as authentic, the court must recognize the existence and content of declaration of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposal document, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof that the content of the disposal document can be denied.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2015Da256732 Decided June 9, 2016 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Da256732, Jun. 9, 2016). According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments set forth in subparagraphs A through 3, the Plaintiff was a contractor on August 5, 2016, and the Plaintiff was a two types of ready-mixed (standard 25-18-80, unit price 58,000 won) from August 6, 2016 to the Defendant, and the Defendant supplied 30 days after completion of construction (the scheduled date of completion of construction, November 30, 2016) to pay the price of ready-mixed in cash to the Defendant; the fact that the Plaintiff supplied 25-21-120, unit price to the Defendant with the seals affixed by each of the above Defendant’s directors and the chairperson, and the Plaintiff’s totaled KRW 306,576,206,27