beta
Text
1. The Defendant: 60,000,000 won to Plaintiff Co., Ltd. and 5% per annum from May 8, 2019 to December 4, 2020.
Reasons
1. Basic facts were prepared between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant as indicated in the consulting agreement on the succession to the management rights of land, building, corporate building, or building.
(hereinafter “this case’s consulting contract”). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Assertion and determination
A. The grounds for the plaintiffs' claim and the changed grounds for the claim are as stated in the attached Form of claim.
B. Determination 1) The fact that the Plaintiff Co., Ltd. provided the service under the instant consulting agreement to the Defendant without dispute between the parties, or that the Plaintiff Co., Ltd. provided the service under the instant consulting agreement to the Defendant can be acknowledged by adding the overall purport of the pleadings to the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 1, and No. 1. Thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff Co., Ltd. 110,000,000 (including value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) and damages for delay, barring any special circumstance.
B) (1) The defendant alleged that the contract of this case was cancelled because he belonged to or did not fulfill his duty with respect to material facts pertaining to the hospital subject to acceptance such as sales, business suspension, etc. However, the evidence Nos. 1 through 9 of this case alone is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff corporation knew the defendant or did not perform its duty under the consulting contract of this case, and there is no other evidence to support this. Thus, the defendant's defense is without merit. Meanwhile, in light of the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 of this case, the defendant paid 50,000,000 won to the plaintiff corporation A as the consulting price under the consulting contract of this case on July 3, 2018, since it is recognized that the defendant paid 50,000 won to the plaintiff corporation as the consulting price under the consulting contract of this case on July 3, 2018.