beta
Text
1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 457,00,000 and the interest rate thereon from May 13, 2016 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. Fact 1) On September 1, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendants concluded a development project on behalf of and a service contract for each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the Defendants, and the Plaintiff fulfilled all its obligations under the said contract until January 20, 2016. Accordingly, the Defendants were to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 50 million and the settlement amount to be paid to the Plaintiff under the said contract. (ii) The Defendants paid the Plaintiff KRW 43 million out of the service payment and settlement amount.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay 457 million won (=50 million won - 43 million won) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from May 13, 2016 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the decision of this case sought by the Plaintiff, after the payment date stipulated in the above contract.
The plaintiff claimed KRW 475 million and claimed that the defendants paid KRW 25 million out of the total amount of KRW 500 million, but the defendants asserted that the total amount of KRW 43 million was KRW 43 million and the defendants stated that the amount to be paid jointly and severally to the plaintiff is KRW 457 million, but the defendants stated that the amount to be paid to the plaintiff is KRW 47 million, the plaintiff did not reduce the claim, and therefore, the plaintiff has maintained the original claim without reducing the claim. Thus, the part exceeding the above KRW 457 million among the plaintiff's claim and damages for delay is without merit.
2. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remainder is dismissed as it is without merit.