beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 41,00,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from August 1, 2015 to October 27, 2016.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a person who is engaged in interior fishery with the trade name of “C”, and the Defendant is a person engaged in franchise business with the trade name of “D,” and the Plaintiff completed additional construction work equivalent to KRW 23 million at the request of the Defendant for construction cost of the interior store of “D” in the form of “D” around April 2015, and the Plaintiff completed additional construction work equivalent to KRW 23 million and KRW 41 million.
B. From April 1, 2015 to April 29, 2015, the Defendant paid KRW 23 million out of the construction price to the Plaintiff. From May 2015, the Defendant prepared and delivered a letter of payment stating that KRW 41 million shall be paid up to June 20, 2015, KRW 20 million up to June 20, 2015, KRW 15 million up to July 10, 2015, and KRW 6 million by July 31, 2015 (Evidence 1).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. The Defendant’s document that is liable for the payment of construction cost ought to be acknowledged as having expressed its intent in accordance with the content of the document, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof that the content of the document is denied.
As to the instant case, once the Plaintiff completed the construction, the Defendant paid KRW 23 million to the Plaintiff, and the amount of KRW 41 million equivalent to the additional construction cost on May 2015, 2015, the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 20 million up to June 20, 2015, KRW 15 million up to July 10, 2015, and KRW 6 million up to July 31, 2015, as indicated in the letter of payment in the instant letter of payment (Evidence (Evidence 1) to the Plaintiff, the Defendant was obligated to pay KRW 41 million up to the additional construction cost up to July 31, 2015, and all the Defendant agreed to pay the additional construction cost up to July 31, 2015.
Therefore, the defendant is the day following the due date for payment, as requested by the plaintiff, of the additional construction cost of KRW 41 million and the plaintiff.