beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 96,871,109 as well as 6% per annum from June 26, 2018 to May 7, 2020 and from the next day.
Reasons
1. In fact, on July 12, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for construction works under a contract with the Daejeon Seo-gu D Corporation (hereinafter “D”) and E Library Remodeling (hereinafter “library Corporation”) for the total construction cost of KRW 949,00,000,00 for the construction works subcontracted by the Defendant Company C (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) and the E Library; the construction period of the non-party company entered into a contract with the non-party company for the construction works under a contract with the non-party company; and completed D and the library works (hereinafter “each of the instant works”) around March 2018, the construction period of which was fixed; and received KRW 949,00,000 from the Defendant.
The Defendant received KRW 112,60,000 (including surtax) from the non-party company by reflecting additional parts of the volume of the work undertaken by the Plaintiff and the Defendant while settling accounts for completion in connection with the non-party company D Corporation.
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings]
2. Determination on the claim
A. As to the primary claim, the Plaintiff asserts that, around March 2018, the Plaintiff requested the Non-Party Company, the prime contractor, to increase the construction price by verifying that the Plaintiff had underpaid the material cost, etc. while proceeding with D Corporation, and that the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff the full amount of the construction price increased by the Non-Party Company received from the non-Party Company. In addition, the Plaintiff sought payment of the increased portion of the 112,60,000 won (12,464,676 won (12,60,000 won - 135,324 won) calculated by deducting the increased portion of the 135,324 won (12,60,000 won) that was paid by the Defendant from the non-party Company.
As to the fact that there was an agreement as alleged by the Plaintiff, the witness F alone is insufficient to accept the witness F’s testimony, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise, the Plaintiff’s primary claim cannot be accepted.
B. The evidence set forth above 1 of the judgment on the conjunctive claim is as follows.