logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.11.04 2016가단20954
공사대금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 26,200,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 6% from June 10, 2016 to November 4, 2016, and the following.

Reasons

1. The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition may be found either in dispute between the parties or in the entry of Gap evidence No. 1 and Gap evidence No. 2 (except for the part of the amount stated in the attached Form).

The Plaintiff is engaged in the business of painting and construction, etc. of “B” and the Defendant is a corporation established for the purpose of construction business, interior fishery, etc.

B. The Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract from the Defendant regarding the construction work details as shown in the attached Form No. 2 of D interior works, etc. (excluding the portion as indicated in the attached Form No. 2 and the amount of the construction work).

C. On December 31, 2014, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of KRW 35.2 million (i.e., the value of supply KRW 32 million) and filed a claim against the Defendant. D.

The Plaintiff was paid KRW 7 million around February 2015 to the Defendant, and KRW 2 million around September 2015 to the Plaintiff.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) As of December 31, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant settled the Plaintiff’s construction price of KRW 36.5 million against the Defendant as of December 31, 2014, and upon the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of KRW 35.2 million (i.e., the value of KRW 32.2 million) (i., the value of KRW 36.5 million). A value-added tax shall be paid KRW 3.2 million pursuant to the tax invoice issued by the Defendant, and the Defendant received KRW 9 million from the Defendant. The Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 30.7 million ( KRW 3.6.5 million) - nine million (3.2 million).

(2) The statement in Gap evidence No. 2 alone lacks sufficient evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant’s prior construction cost exceeding KRW 32 million (excluding value-added tax) recognized as the Defendant’s obligation to the Plaintiff, and otherwise, that the construction cost is KRW 36.5 million (excluding value-added tax).

Therefore, the unpaid construction cost of the Defendant is KRW 26.2 million (= KRW 32 million) - KRW 9 million).

B. The Defendant’s determination as to the Defendant’s assertion is based on the instant construction cost.

arrow