beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 166,414,00 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from September 7, 2017 to September 27, 2017.
Reasons
Basic Facts
The plaintiff is a corporation established for the purpose of building design business and supervision business, and the defendant is a corporation established for the purpose of trust of land and fixtures and related business under the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act.
On October 11, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a design service agreement with a non-party A (hereinafter referred to as “A”)’s family hotel located in B as follows:
(hereinafter “instant hotel” and “instant design contract”). A building design contract
1. Design contract name: The design of the hotel in this case;
4. Contract amount: The owner on October 11, 2013, Map 200,00,000,000,000 additional tax per day: The owner on October 11, 2013: The rights, duties, etc. between the parties necessary for Gap to perform design duties entrusted to Eul pursuant to Article 23 (1) of the Certified Architects Act shall be determined by Article 1 (General Provisions) of this Agreement;
Article 2 (Period of Service) The period for performing design service shall be from the contract date to the completion of inspection for use.
Article 7 (Method of Payment of Service Costs) (1) Method of payment of service costs by phases shall be in accordance with the following standards:
Provided, That where on-site conditions and design conditions are special or duties are added, it shall be determined by consultation with A and B.
At the time of completion of construction permission of 20,000,000 at the time of non-fixed-term contract of 10,30,000,000, the non-party C Co. (hereinafter “C”) separate from A Co. (hereinafter “C”) established separately by the representative director of D to promote the new project of the hotel of this case on January 20, 205, when the owner of the building of the hotel of this case was changed from A to C on February 2, 2015, the status of the Plaintiff and C Co. (hereinafter “A”) as the owner of the building of this case on February 2, 2015, when the construction permission of 20,000 was completed at the time of completion of 40,000,000,000 construction permission was completed, the non-party C Co. (hereinafter “C”) was not the owner of the building of this case on January 20, 2015.