beta
Text
1. Defendant C Co., Ltd.: (a) KRW 75,943,309 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from August 1, 2013 to April 18, 2018.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a company aimed at manufacturing and selling wooden furniture devices. Defendant B is a person who engages in construction business, etc. under the trade name of “D”, and Defendant C Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Defendant C”) is a company established on July 5, 2013 for the purpose of furniture manufacturing business, etc., and Defendant B is registered as a director.
B. On November 30, 201, the Plaintiff and Defendant B entered into a contract for construction works (hereinafter “instant contract”) among the “Gdong neighborhood living facilities and city-type housing construction works” located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, under which the construction cost was KRW 6.45 million (hereinafter “instant construction works”).
[Judgment of the court below] Facts that there is no dispute over part of the grounds for recognition, entry of Gap's evidence 1 through 3 (including each branch number in the case of additional number) and the purport of whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B
A. Notwithstanding the instant contract that the Plaintiff and Defendant B would become a joint contractor for E in connection with the instant construction project, the Plaintiff agreed to supply Defendant B with the amount equivalent to KRW 350 million necessary for the instant construction project, and actually supplied goods worth KRW 345,721,300,000 to Defendant B, and then settled the amount of KRW 310,000,000 between the Plaintiff and Defendant B.
However, Defendant B is obligated to pay the remainder of KRW 75,943,309 (= KRW 310,000,000 - KRW 234,056,691) and damages for delay, since Defendant B paid the sum of KRW 234,056,691, including the sum of KRW 111,056,691, out of the above settlement amount.
B. It is insufficient to recognize that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, such as the Plaintiff’s statement of Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 10, witness E, and H’s testimony, etc. is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff agreed between the Plaintiff and Defendant B to pay the price and supply the tea, etc. as alleged in the Plaintiff’s assertion, notwithstanding the instant contract. This is different.