beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. 사안의 개요 다음과 같은 사실은 당사자 사이에 다툼이 없거나, 갑 1, 2호증, 을 1∽7호증(가지번호 포함)의 각 기재, 증인 A의 일부 증언과 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하여 이를 인정할 수 있다.
① On March 10, 2014, the Defendant entered into a construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) with the Plaintiff on the performance hall metal works among Daejeon C works contracted by B construction, including construction period from March 10, 2014 to July 31, 2014, construction cost of KRW 381,00,000 (including value-added tax), monthly claim for payment method (based on the starting terms of “B Construction”), monthly claim for payment method (based on the starting terms of “B Construction”), and the principle of adjusting volume after completion of construction (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).
② On August 30, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a modified contract with the content of changing the construction cost to KRW 427,900,000 (including value-added tax) in the instant construction contract.
③ The instant construction project was completed in December 2014 after the above amendment contract was made, and the amount of the instant construction cost that the Defendant paid directly or by subrogation until February 2015 is KRW 442,047,650.
The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total construction cost of KRW 649,00,00 (including value-added tax) including the additional construction cost after making a subsequent settlement of volume pursuant to the instant construction contract, and that the settlement agreement was made between the Defendant and the Defendant on January 10, 2015, with the total construction cost of KRW 649,00,000 (including value-added tax). Since the settlement agreement was made between the Defendant and the Defendant on January 10, 2015, the amount of KRW 59,000 (including value-added tax), the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 151,952,350 (= KRW 594,00,000 - KRW 442,07,650).
The defendant asserts that the defendant's employee D in charge of the plaintiff's demand for settlement only responded to negotiations equivalent to the total amount of KRW 399,000,000 (excluding value-added tax), the settlement agreement was not reached between the original defendant, and even if the compensation for delay was excluded, the defendant paid the construction price more to the plaintiff.
2. Between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.