beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be principal lawsuit and counterclaim.
Reasons
1. Determination on the main claim
A. (1) A determination on the cause of the claim (1) based on the master’s repair contract concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”), the Plaintiff did not dispute between the parties that the aggregate amount of KRW 20,413,70 ( KRW 1,430,000 on the tax invoice as of January 30, 2013, KRW 8,900,000 on the tax invoice as of March 26, 2013, KRW 3,172,400 on the tax invoice as of April 30, 2013, KRW 1,411,30,500 on the tax invoice as of April 30, 2013, and KRW 5,500 on the tax invoice as of April 30, 2013.
(2) Next, comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire argument in Gap evidence No. 8, the Plaintiff is acknowledged to have repaired the repair amount of KRW 3,355,550 as stated in the tax invoice of March 30, 2013 based on the instant contract.
As to this, the Defendant agreed that the aforementioned tax invoice issued on March 30, 2013 in duplicate with the tax invoice issued on March 26, 2013 and the Plaintiff and the Defendant were discarded. In fact, the Plaintiff did not accept the amount of value-added tax equivalent to KRW 3,355,550. However, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff did not report value-added tax on March 30, 2013 when filing a return by seller. However, the circumstance that the Defendant did not report value-added tax on the tax invoice issued on March 30, 2013 (No. 2, No. 17 evidence No. 1, No. 17-6) is insufficient to reverse the recognition and there is no other counter-proof, and this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
(3) In addition, comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the statements in the evidence Nos. 7 and 9, the Plaintiff is recognized to have repaired the repair price of 3,245,275 won (1,51,400 won 1,73,875 won) on May 2013 under the instant contract, and the repair price of 2,198,900 won (1,529,000 won) on June 2013, 2013.
In regard to this, the defendant submitted a transaction statement to the defendant, and when the plaintiff claims the repair price, the plaintiff and the defendant have negotiated on the repair price stated in the transaction statement and have decided the final payment amount. However, May 201 and June 201.