beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 80,684,474 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from August 29, 2015 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. From September 16, 2009, the Defendant had been performing the construction of a multifunctional administrative city B from the Korea Land and Housing Corporation. On November 23, 2012, the Defendant subcontracted part of the said construction project (hereinafter “instant construction”) to a limited liability company (hereinafter “non-viber Construction”) in the price of KRW 260,000,000.
B. As the Plaintiff supplied oil to BB construction and was not paid the price, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against B BB with the Daejeon District Court 2015Kadan4846, which decided on April 21, 2015 that BB construction would pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 72,590,669 and the damages for delay thereof. The judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
C. The Plaintiff, based on the authentic copy of the judgment with executory power of the instant case, filed an application for a seizure and collection order, which is a debtor B construction, a garnishee, a garnishee, a claim amounting to KRW 80,684,474, and a claim to be seized and collected, and a claim to be seized and collected, “Non-Bber Construction’s claim for construction cost against the Multifunctional Administrative City B construction performed by the Defendant in supply and demand from the Defendant,” and received a seizure and collection order from the said court (hereinafter “instant collection order”). The instant collection order was served on the Defendant on June 29, 2015.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts finding as to the plaintiff's cause of claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the collection amount of KRW 80,684,474 and delay damages, unless there are special circumstances.
B. The Defendant deposits KRW 115,603,79 in preparation for any defect in relation to the instant construction project, and the Defendant’s assertion and the summary of the Defendant’s assertion, and thus, the deposit in the instant construction cost should be deducted from the construction cost. Since the said construction cost overlaps with the seizure of other creditors.