logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원충주지원 2016.07.07 2016가합3324
공사대금
Text

1. The Defendant shall complete the payment of KRW 124,240,530 as well as the payment of KRW 124,240,530 as to the Plaintiff’s Central Corporation.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 28, 201, the Defendant paid KRW 154,240,530,00 for the unpaid construction cost related to the panel and freezing equipment, the EHP supply and installation work to the Plaintiff’s central center of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and paid KRW 10,000,000 until September 29, 201, and KRW 20,000,000 until November 29, 201, and KRW 30,000,000,000 until November 29, 201, and KRW 40,000,000,000, and KRW 40,000,000,000 until December 29, 2012, the Defendant paid KRW 30,000,000,000,000 for late payment until December 29, 200, 2012, respectively.

B. On September 28, 201, the Defendant: (a) paid the Plaintiff KRW 272,00,000 to the Plaintiff; and (b) written a written statement of payment to pay KRW 200,000,000 by October 31, 201, and KRW 72,00,000 by December 31, 201.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff's Central Government of the amount of KRW 154,240,530 less KRW 30,000,00,000, which is calculated by subtracting the plaintiff's central notice from the construction cost of KRW 154,240,530, and damages for delay at the rate of KRW 30% per annum under the agreement from March 30, 2012 to the date of full payment (=2.5% per month x 12), which is the date following the last payment, to the date of full payment. The defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff's late payment damages at the rate of KRW 272,00,000 under the above payment note and at the rate of KRW 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from January 1, 2012, which is the date following the last payment date.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims against the defendant are with merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow