beta
Text
1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 99,086,580 and the interest rate thereon from January 21, 2017 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff: (a) provided human resources at the construction site of the Escopic Escopic construction site of the Defendant Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”); and (b) did not receive personnel expenses after receiving the personnel expenses; (c) on December 27, 2016, the Defendant Co., Ltd. prepared and delivered the “written 20% overdue interest per annum (Evidence No. 1) to the Plaintiff on January 20, 2017 in a case where the labor expenses of KRW 108,782,00 are paid by January 20, 2017, and delayed payment, the Defendant Co., Ltd signed as a joint and several surety.
According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant D, a joint and several surety of Defendant Company and its joint and several surety, is jointly and severally liable to pay 9,086,580 won and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 20% per annum under the agreement from January 21, 2017 to the date of full payment, which is the following day of the payment.
2. The defendants' assertion and judgment
A. Defendant Company asserted that personnel expenses for the Plaintiff were not paid by Nonparty F, the original office building, and thus, it cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim. However, it is insufficient to recognize the direct payment agreement of the original office building asserted by Defendant Company B solely on the statement of No. 1, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.
B. Defendant D, as a representative director of the Defendant Company, has jointly and severally guaranteed the rejection letter of default as above, but it asserted that he retired from office as the representative director on February 15, 2017 and all of the obligations have been taken over to a new representative director. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the aforementioned assertion.
Therefore, all defendants' arguments are not accepted.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified, and all of them are accepted. It is so decided as per Disposition.