beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 217,989,410 among the Plaintiff and KRW 200,535,311 among the Plaintiff, shall be KRW 17,454,09.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 9, 2011, Samsung Engineering Co., Ltd. entered into a contract with Manden Roling Roling Co., Ltd. (Maden Roling Roling Posium) by a single contracting method with respect to the facilities and equipment under Alumin aluminium pressure.
B. On January 10, 201, the Defendant concluded a contract for the manufacture of steel frame required for Samsung Engineering Co., Ltd. and its voltage facilities.
C. On January 15, 2012, the Plaintiff engaged in the manufacturing business of shipbuilding machinery and steel structure, etc. under the trade name of “B” entered into a subcontract with the Defendant on the part of the manufacturing process of the said steel frame (hereinafter “instant work”). The details are as follows.
Construction period: Construction period: cutting the applicable unit price (units: prime/km) for each process from January 15, 2012 to March 30, 2012, 15% 280 42 fit-up 35% 98 xling 40% 112pcen 7% 19.6 3% of 8.4 shot 20% 20% of 280 56 56 1stcon 20% of 35% of 25% of coononononononononononon 98 70%, total 640% of 80% of total 640%, as set out below:
(Additional Value-Added Tax; hereinafter the same shall apply). Payment shall be made: On the 20th of the following month after the end of each month with respect to the goods sent, including the supplies guaranteed by the person responsible for purchase, the amount of the contract to be approved in cash may be changed, and shall be adjusted later on the basis of the storage materials and the Cutting Pream.
On May 18, 2012, the Plaintiff again performed the work previously conducted in accordance with the Defendant’s correction and deletion order. On May 18, 2012, the Plaintiff claimed KRW 159,217,50 in total for the work cost incurred prior to the Defendant’s correction and deletion order regarding AHU, S/TWER and container electric reproduction while the work in the instant case (the document between the Plaintiff and the Defendant stated “water maintenance” or “revision work cost” in the document between the Plaintiff and the Defendant; hereinafter “dive work cost”) and for the work cost performed by the Plaintiff prior to the Defendant’s correction and deletion order.