beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff’s assertion entered into an event services contract with the Defendant, 9 million won on November 24, 2016, and 5.72 million won on December 7, 2016, and provided goods and services in accordance with the contract. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder 1,17.6 million won after deducting the already paid KRW 7.5 million from the total sum of the above amounts plus the amount of goods supplied by the Plaintiff.
2. The fact that the event service contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant around November 24, 2016 and around December 7, 2016 does not conflict between the parties, but it is difficult to recognize the fact that the contract was concluded in accordance with the amount claimed by the Plaintiff only by the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of three million won after deducting the agreed price of KRW 10,500,000 from the agreed price of KRW 10.5 million, which the Defendant is the Plaintiff (= KRW 10.5 million - 7,500,000), which the Plaintiff seeks after the due date for payment, from January 14, 2017 to April 18, 2018, which is reasonable to dispute over the existence and scope of the Defendant’s obligation to pay the amount calculated at the annual rate of KRW 5,500,000 as stipulated in the Civil Act and the next day from the date of the first instance judgment to the date of full payment.
(G) In light of the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff’s claim in this case is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remainder should be dismissed as there is no justifiable reason. (3) The Plaintiff’s claim in this case should be accepted within the scope of the above recognition. (4) The Plaintiff’s claim in this case should be dismissed as it is reasonable. (5) The Plaintiff’s claim in this case should be dismissed. (4) The Plaintiff’s claim in this case should be dismissed as it is reasonable. (5) The Plaintiff’s claim in this case should be dismissed as it is reasonable.
The part concerning damages for delay in the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair, but this conclusion is unfair.