beta
Text
The defendant shall pay 5,680,000 won to the plaintiff and 6% per annum from January 29, 2020 to February 13, 2020 and the next day.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
가. 원고는 기계설비공사업, 소방공사업 등을 목적으로 하는 회사이고, 피고는 토목건축공사업을 목적으로 하는 회사이다.
B. From February 14, 2018 to March 30, 2019, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 1,517,818,18,182 (excluding value-added tax) for the construction of machinery and equipment from February 14, 2018 to March 30, 2019 with respect to the construction of machinery and equipment among the new construction works of the Escopia located in the Escopia located in the Escopia. Since the construction is changed due to the movement of the cooperation room and urban gas additional construction works, the Plaintiff and the Defendant completed the construction and agreed to reduce the increased or decreased amount of design change on July 9, 2019 (excluding value-added tax) by 22,681,818,18,182 (excluding value-added tax) after the settlement and deduction of the waste disposal expenses of KRW 5,500,00 (excluding value-added tax).
C. The Plaintiff did not receive construction cost of KRW 55,680,000, out of the amount settled by the Defendant.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the parties' arguments
A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 5,680,000 won (including additional taxes) and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum of 12% per annum under the Commercial Act from January 29, 2020 to February 13, 2020, which is clear that the delivery date of the application for the payment order in this case is the delivery date of the payment order in this case, and from the following day to the date of full payment.
B. As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant asserts that there is no obligation to pay the amount of KRW 1,700,000 as the completion drawings out of the construction price unpaid by the plaintiff's assertion, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it. Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
3. The plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.