beta
Text
1. The part concerning the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.
Of the main claim of this case, 19,032,625 won and its corresponding amount.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a company that aims at civil engineering and construction business, housing construction business, etc., and the Defendant is a company that aims at civil engineering, construction business, packing business, etc.
B. On December 26, 2012, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Plaintiff on December 26, 2012 under which the part of the instant construction work (hereinafter “first construction work”) was set up during the construction period from December 20, 2012 to May 31, 2013, and the construction cost of KRW 450 million (hereinafter “instant contract”).
C. Around April 30, 2013, the Plaintiff completed the primary construction work. The Defendant paid to the Plaintiff a total of KRW 340 million on March 12, 2013, the subcontract price of which was KRW 140 million, and KRW 340 million on April 23, 2013.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the main claim
A. 1) According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the subcontract price of KRW 110 million (= KRW 450 million - KRW 340 million) and delay damages therefrom to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances. The Defendant asserts that the construction amount under the contract of this case is reduced to KRW 390,90,000, or the Plaintiff did not perform construction works equivalent to KRW 59,100,000,00,000, which is the difference. However, as seen in paragraph 3. (3) below, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff completed construction works corresponding to the construction amount under the contract of this case, and it is difficult to recognize an agreement for reduction of construction amount as argued by the Defendant. The Defendant’s assertion and judgment on subsequent construction works are without merit.