beta
Text
1. The Defendant: 104,891,400 won to the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from September 17, 2015 to February 10, 2017.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On November 27, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant on the construction period from December 1, 2014 to March 31, 2015, with respect to the construction of the three-story neighborhood living facilities on the ground level (hereinafter “instant building”) on the land outside 4-7 and three lots of land of the Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seodong-gu, Seosung-do (hereinafter “instant construction”) with the Plaintiff, with the construction cost of KRW 1.3 billion (excluding value-added tax).
B. On January 2, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract with respect to the instant contract, with respect to the part of the installation of earth facilities among the construction of household facilities from January 3, 2015 to March 15, 2015, with respect to the construction cost of KRW 126,50,000 (including surtax) (hereinafter “instant soil facilities construction”).
C. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 1,430,00,000 for the instant construction cost, including value-added tax, and the approval for use was granted on June 16, 2015 for the instant building.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2-1, 2, Gap evidence 6, Eul evidence 8, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant earth mounds concluded on January 2, 2015, KRW 126,50,00 for construction cost, KRW 5,691,400 for additional installation cost, KRW 3,300 for energy saving approval cost, KRW 2,490,530 for Korea Electric Power Corporation, and KRW 137,981,930 for additional payments from the Defendant.
B. On January 2, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into an additional construction agreement with respect to the instant construction project, which covers the amount of KRW 126,500,000 as construction cost, during the instant construction project. Since the Plaintiff performed the construction project under the said construction project, the Defendant is obligated to pay the amount equivalent to the said price to the Plaintiff.
In this regard, the defendant will survey the restoration of the boundary related to the construction of this case.