1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. In the first instance court, the Plaintiff sought for the payment of transportation charges, oil expenses, tolls, five-month transportation charges, five-month oil expenses, tolls, four-month oil expenses, and penalty for breach of contract against the Defendant. The first instance court accepted the claims as stated in paragraphs (1), (2) and (3) and dismissed the remainder of the claims as stated in paragraphs (5).

Since only the defendant appealed against this issue, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the claim as set forth in paragraphs (1) and (2) above.

2. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the underlying facts is that the “1. Basic Facts” part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the part concerning the “1. Basic Facts,” and thus, they are cited by the main sentence

3. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s determination on the cause of the claim amounting to KRW 36,824,218 (i.e., KRW 26,824,218,00) (i.e., KRW 10,000) and KRW 36,824,218 (i.e., KRW 26,824,218). As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at each rate of KRW 20% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from June 26, 2015, the day following the delivery of the copy of the complaint in this case, to June 26, 2015, which is the date of the first instance judgment, until March 15, 2016, which is the date of the delivery of the Defendant’s obligation to perform, and the next day until the day of full payment.

4. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. In full view of the provisions of Articles 4(1) and 6(1) of the instant contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay transport charges of KRW 2,500,000 per month on the premise that the Plaintiff and the Defendant enter into the instant contract and run more than ten times per vehicle. Even if there is room for different interpretation of the instant contract, the instant contract shall be interpreted in accordance with the interpretation of the Defendant if there is a difference between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s opinion.