logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.01.22 2018나61468
공사대금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person operating a wholesale and retail business, such as interior construction, construction materials, etc., with the trade name of “C”, and the Defendant is a person operating a interior and retail business with the trade name of “D.”

B. On April 2017, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction upon receiving the Defendant’s request that the Plaintiff engage in films construction and flame retardation construction (hereinafter “instant construction”) of “F” located in Suwon-si E 2nd floor of Suwon-si.

C. On April 24, 2017, the Plaintiff sent a written estimate indicating the total construction cost of the instant construction project in KRW 4,250,345 (including value-added tax) to the Defendant. On April 25, 2017, the following day, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of KRW 3,860,000 (value-added tax 386,00) to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 4,250,345 as well as the delay damages for the construction work of this case, unless there are special circumstances.

In light of the following circumstances, the Defendant asserted to the effect that the above construction cost cannot be acknowledged, but the Defendant did not raise any objection to the amount of the written estimate sent by the Plaintiff, and the Defendant did not raise any objection to the amount of the Plaintiff’s text messages received by the Plaintiff, the Defendant received a written estimate from the Plaintiff, and notified the Plaintiff of the information necessary to issue a tax invoice, such as the business registration number and e-mail address of “D”, and issued the said tax invoice as it is, and the Plaintiff was not punished due to the issuance of false tax invoices.

arrow