beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 12, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a contract for extension construction for facilities for the elderly who are the third floor building on the ground C (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) with the term “total construction cost of KRW 125,00,000,000, the date of commencement, May 17, 2014, and July 10, 2014,” respectively.
B. Under the instant construction contract, the Plaintiff paid KRW 50,000,000 as the down payment to the Defendant on May 12, 2014, and paid KRW 10,000 each of the intermediate payment on May 26, 2014 and June 2, 2014, and paid KRW 70,000,000 as the instant construction price.
[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion did not resume the construction work after unilaterally suspending the construction work after he received the down payment and intermediate payment of KRW 70,000,000 from the Plaintiff. As such, the Plaintiff rescinded the instant construction contract. Since the construction work was merely equivalent to KRW 30,000,000 at the time when the Defendant discontinued the construction work, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment 40,000,000 (the already paid construction cost - KRW 30,000,000) and damages for delay.
B. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff paid KRW 70,00,000 in total to the Defendant for the down payment and intermediate payment of the instant construction contract. In full view of the Plaintiff’s evidence Nos. 4-1 and 2 as well as the overall purport of the pleadings, the fact that the Defendant did not complete the construction work under the instant construction contract and was in a situation where contact was interrupted, and that the Plaintiff rescinded the instant construction contract by delivery of a duplicate of the complaint of this case. However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is difficult to acknowledge the fact that the construction cost was merely KRW 30,00,000 at the time of the discontinuance of the construction work, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this.