beta
Text
1. As to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s KRW 83,462,00 and KRW 41,762,00 among them, the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant)’s KRW 83,462,00 on September 28, 201.
Reasons
1. The following facts can be acknowledged in light of the following facts in light of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, 6, 7, 9, Gap evidence Nos. 10-1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 16, and 21, Eul's testimony, Eul's witness Eul's testimony, witness D's witness witness witness testimony (except for the part not trusted in the front and rear) and the overall purport of the arguments.
From August 2010, the Defendant had his father E as the owner of the building, and had built a detached house and a neighborhood living facility building (hereinafter “instant building”) on the ground of the 1st underground floor and the 4th floor above the ground in Gyeyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu.
B. On January 28, 201, the Defendant indicated the name of the contractor E, the contractor, and the contractor’s name as the KTN General Construction Company (hereinafter “KTN Construction”), and entered into a contract for the remainder (hereinafter “instant contract for construction”) of the instant building with the construction period of KRW 850,000 (including additional construction, payment within 15 days after completion) from November 16, 201 to April 30, 201, which was determined as the construction period of KRW 850,00,000 (including additional construction, and payment within 15 days after completion).
C. From November 16, 2010, the Plaintiff performed the instant construction work by subcontracting the instant construction work to another person, and by receiving the construction cost from the Defendant and using it as construction cost. As a result, the approval for use of the instant building was granted on August 29, 201.
However, around September 8, 2011, the Plaintiff was locked with the completion of a part of the instant construction work, and the Defendant thereafter allowed D to proceed with the remaining work.
Around December 2011, the Defendant and D entered into the instant construction contract with the Defendant by lending the name of the KTN General Construction with a construction business license in KRW 850,000,000, and then subcontracted the instant construction contract to A in KRW 650,000,000.
However, the Plaintiff.