beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 53,840,673 and a rate of KRW 20% per annum from August 28, 2014 to the date of complete payment.
Reasons
Facts of recognition
According to each of the statements and arguments stated in Gap evidence 1 through 4 and 6, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply of asphalt with the defendant on June 29, 2012, and provided the defendant with the aggregate of KRW 185,840,673 from June 29, 2012 to September 9, 2012 according to the above supply contract.
(A) Although the Defendant asserts that the amount equivalent to approximately KRW 20,000,000 among the above asphalts was mistakenly calculated, the video of the evidence No. 2 is insufficient to reverse the above recognition.
A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of 53,840,673 won, subtracting the Plaintiff’s 132,00,000 won from June 26, 2012 to August 7, 2013, and damages for delay, barring special circumstances.
B. On February 7, 2014, the Defendant asserted to the effect that the Defendant could not respond to the claim for the portion exceeding the above amount, since the Defendant settled the accounts of the unpaid asphalt amount of KRW 32,00,000,00, and became final and conclusive until that time with the Plaintiff.
According to the statement No. 1, it is recognized that the Plaintiff and the Defendant written a written statement of non-performance on February 7, 2014, stating that “The Defendant agrees to pay the Plaintiff the subcontract price of KRW 32,00,000 that the Defendant shall pay to the Defendant.”
However, the above direct payment agreement does not state that the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to determine the amount of the unpaid asphalt amount of KRW 32,00,000,000. Thus, it cannot be readily concluded that the amount of the construction price that the Defendant agreed to pay is the amount of the unpaid asphalt agreed between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. Moreover, the above direct payment agreement does not contain the signature or seal of the representative of the corporation, and the obligation and obligation between the Defendant and the Defendant cannot be clearly known.