beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
The purport and purport of the appeal
1. The purport of the claim;
Reasons
1. In light of the overall purport of Gap's statements and arguments as to the cause of the claim as to Gap's evidence Nos. 3 through 5, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the intervenor calculated the first construction from the defendant with respect to D pipelines Corporation as to August 15, 2018 (a value-added separate; hereinafter the same shall apply), the second construction as to September 8, 2019, the third construction as to September 15, 200, the third construction as to Oct. 10, 2018, and completed the construction as to Oct. 5, 2018, the fact that the supplementary construction was completed as to September 201, and that the defendant settled the amount as to Oct. 10, 201, and paid as 00 won to the defendant's side and 5,80,0000 won, and 200 won after September 10, 2018.
Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay to the intervenor delayed damages calculated at the rate of 12% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc. from April 24, 2020 to the date of full payment after a copy of the application for intervention of the independent party of this case was served on the defendant, which is the sum of 4,173,100 won added to the remaining construction cost of KRW 41,731,00 ( =71,731,000 - 30,000 - 173,100,000).
2. Determination on the defendant's defense
A. In the construction cost claimed by the Intervenor in the summary of the Defendant’s defense, the costs to be borne by the Intervenor are to be borne by the Defendant on behalf of the Defendant: ① Prosecutor’s 20,900,000, ② Factory rent of KRW 4,400,00, and ③ Labor cost of KRW 5,000,000, ④ Defect’s 3,250,000, and ④ Defect’s 11,50,000,000, and 45,05,000,000, for the delayed payment period or due to defects in the construction.
B. The Prosecutor’s portion of KRW 20,900,000, which is to be borne by the Intervenor, is the Defendant’s burden of KRW 20,90,000 on behalf of the Defendant, and thus, the said cost should be deducted from the construction cost of this case.
Domins, Eul evidence No. 4-1.