beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 108,419,050 for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from July 16, 2015 to December 18, 2015.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a company engaged in stone production business, collection of earth and rocks, and aggregate sales business, and the Defendant is a company engaged in construction waste disposal business, crushing business, such as aggregate, etc.
B. Upon the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff supplied aggregate amounting to KRW 127,419,050 in total from December 1, 2011 to December 3, 2013. On April 9, 2012, the Defendant paid KRW 19,000,000 to the Plaintiff.
[Judgment of the court below] The ground for recognition is without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remaining aggregate amount of KRW 108,419,050 (=127,419,050 - 19,000), and to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from July 16, 2015 to December 18, 2015, the date following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, which is the date of the decision, to dispute the existence and scope of the Defendant’s obligation to perform.
(The plaintiff asserts that he claim for damages for delay from December 4, 2013. However, there is no evidence to prove that there was an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant on the settlement period or payment date of the aggregate price of this case.
The Defendant’s assertion and its determination 1) The Defendant’s claim for aggregate payment in this case by the Defendant’s assertion was terminated in April 2014 by the settlement agreement (the Plaintiff’s actual operator D, the Plaintiff’s former E, and the Defendant’s representative director F) with the content that it would offset the Defendant’s claim for the instant aggregate payment against the Defendant’s loans to the Plaintiff, Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”), which is an affiliated company of the Defendant. Rather, the Plaintiff’s claim for aggregate payment in this case remains KRW 233,380,950 after the settlement agreement and set-off disposition. 2) The recognition of the relevant fact remains as a mid-term rental business and construction waste.