beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s appeal against the instant principal lawsuit and counterclaim is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be the principal lawsuit.
Reasons
1. In the first instance court’s trial scope, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the payment of the construction cost. The Defendant asserted against the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff offsets the Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of the construction cost equivalent to the same amount, while claiming a counterclaim seeking the payment of the compensation for defect repair. The first instance court accepted a claim for damages among the Defendant’s counterclaim claims, and dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim for the principal claim and the Defendant’s counterclaim.
Therefore, since only the plaintiff appealed against the part against which the plaintiff lost, it is judged that only the plaintiff's main claim and the claim for damages among the defendant's counterclaim are subject to the judgment of this court.
2. Basic facts
A. The relationship between the parties 1) The Plaintiff is a corporation that engages in the business of free sale and creative construction, etc., and the Defendant is a person who operates a personal business with the trade name of C. (2) On December 21, 2015, the Plaintiff received orders from the Defendant to construct a new Busan Gangseo-gu D2 Factory (hereinafter “instant factory”) located in Gangseo-gu, Busan (hereinafter “D”) and constructed a glass Corporation (hereinafter “instant glass Corporation”).
B. Around December 21, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) determined the unit price of supply and construction per square meter for the instant glass project with the Defendant; and (b) completed the supply and construction related to the instant glass project from December 29, 2015 to March 3, 2016; (c) the Plaintiff claimed KRW 135,300,000 for the instant glass project to the Defendant around March 3, 2016.
C. 1) With respect to the instant glass project, there was a problem that the Plaintiff’s fluoral part of the glass is not transparent due to the Plaintiff’s processing error, and the Plaintiff’s fluoral color or fluorial color was displayed. 2) In order to do so, the Plaintiff constructed a construction project by adding the fluoral part of the glass fluor to the actual container.
3 The plaintiff and the defendant shall be free of interest.