beta
Text
1. Defendant Daesung Comprehensive Development Co., Ltd.: (a) KRW 25,107,568 and its amount from February 16, 2016 to June 22, 2016.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the claim against Defendant Daesung Comprehensive Development Corporation
A. The description of the claim is as shown in the annexed sheet of claim.
(b) Articles 208 (3) 2 and 150 (3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act of the applicable provisions of Acts;
2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant Lee Hyeong Construction Co., Ltd.
A. On the basis of the facts, Defendant Lee Jong-sung Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Lee Sung-sung Construction”) subcontracted the construction and extension of a factory to the Defendant Dae-sung Comprehensive Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Dae-sung Comprehensive Development”), which was conducted in 400-3 in iasan-si, Sinsan-si. The Plaintiff supplied the Defendant Dae-sung Comprehensive Development with goods such as reinforcement block and waterway pipes, etc. used at the construction site. The Plaintiff supplied the said goods to the Defendant Sung-sung Comprehensive Development from December 7, 2015 to February 15, 2016 according to the orders of the Defendant Dae-sung Comprehensive Development. The price for the goods that the Defendant Sung-sung Comprehensive Development was unpaid to the Plaintiff is not disputed between the parties, or the purport of the entire arguments can be acknowledged in view of the following: evidence Nos. 1, 2, 2, and 3-1, and evidence Nos. 2, and evidence No. 2, 2015.
B. The Plaintiff’s assertion that Defendant Lee Jong-sung Construction promised to pay the Plaintiff the price for the goods unpaid to the Plaintiff, and thus, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the price for the goods unpaid to the Plaintiff in accordance with such agreement.
C. The written consent to the direct and non-performance of the Plaintiff’s submission (Evidence A No. 4) was made by Defendant Pyeong General Construction to Defendant Pyeong General Construction. The content is merely that Defendant Pyeong General Construction consented to the direct payment of the material price to the Plaintiff, and that Defendant Pyeong General Construction does not raise any objection thereto. Thus, Defendant Pyeong General Construction directly pays the material price to the Plaintiff.