beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 30,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from July 7, 2012 to April 5, 2013 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On April 30, 2012, the Plaintiff received a contract for the steel structure works (D extension works) located in Gwangju City in Gyeonggi-do from the Defendant operating B on April 30, 2012 with the construction cost of KRW 126,50,000 (including value added tax of KRW 11,50,000, KRW 400,000 at the time of concluding the contract, and KRW 86,500,000 that remains remaining within ten days after the completion of the construction regardless of the completion of the construction) and completed the construction work on May 30, 2012.
B. On April 30, 2012, the Plaintiff received KRW 40,000,000 from the Defendant as the down payment, and KRW 12,00,000 on June 8, 2012, and KRW 24,00,000 on July 6, 2012.
C. On June 11, 2012, E transferred money to the Plaintiff on behalf of the Defendant (including KRW 1,300,000), and KRW 7,700,000 (including KRW 700,000) on July 25, 2012, to the Plaintiff on behalf of the Defendant. On October 24, 2012, the Defendant transferred KRW 2,00,000 to F at the Plaintiff’s request.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole video and pleading
2. The assertion and judgment
A. According to the facts as seen earlier prior to the payment of the unpaid construction cost, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the construction cost of KRW 30,000,000,000, excluding the value-added tax of KRW 115,000,000, which the Plaintiff was paid at KRW 115,000,000, not including the value-added tax of KRW 12,000 (24,000,000, excluding the value-added tax of KRW 24,000,000, excluding the value-added tax of KRW 12,000,000), and the damages for delay claimed by the Plaintiff following the date of the payment.
B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant asserted that KRW 14,300,000 (including additional taxes and KRW 700,000,000, which was remitted by E directly to the Plaintiff on June 11, 2012, should also be deducted from the instant construction cost. However, according to the purport of the statement and the entire argument in subparagraph 3-1 through 3, it was remitted on June 11, 2012 as above.