beta
Text
1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
2. All costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendants.
purport, purport, and.
Reasons
The claims of the parties were made by the parties, the Youngnam Regional Headquarters Co., Ltd., the Korea Rural Community Corporation (hereinafter “E”) awarded a contract for repair facility renovation works in preparation for disaster in the zone E (hereinafter “E”), and E awarded a subcontract to the Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) during the above construction (hereinafter “instant construction”). The Defendant Company, verbally, ordered the instant construction works to be subcontracted to the Plaintiff at KRW 25,000,000.
Although the Plaintiff completed the instant construction, the Defendant Company paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff on October 31, 2016 and did not pay the remainder of the construction cost.
Defendant C agreed to pay KRW 15,00,000 to the Plaintiff by January 5, 2017, as a person who actually runs the Defendant Company, around December 23, 2016.
Therefore, the Defendants claim for the payment of the unpaid construction cost or the agreed amount of KRW 15,00,000 and damages for delay from January 6, 2017.
The Defendants Company did not subcontract the instant construction to the Plaintiff.
Defendant C provided that the Plaintiff would pay KRW 15,00,000 to the Plaintiff by January 5, 2017 with respect to the instant construction project on or around December 23, 2016, however, it is not effective as it was drafted by the Plaintiff’s coercion.
The Defendant Company received a subcontract for the instant construction work from E in KRW 24,700,000, and thus, it does not bear the obligation to pay not less than the said subcontract price to the Plaintiff.
Judgment
In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 2-1, 2, and 3 (the defendants defense that Eul evidence 2-1 was made by coercion of the plaintiff, but it is not sufficient to recognize the evidence Eul evidence 2-2), Eul evidence 3, and Eul evidence 1, the defendant company, as a limited merchant, was awarded a subcontract for the construction of this case from Eul around March 24, 2016 to 34,10,000 won (including value-added tax).