beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 43,344,263 and the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from June 23, 2014 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Facts without dispute;
A. On October 19, 2012, the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for KRW 357,500,000, including value-added tax, for tin part of the C-built Construction Work (hereinafter “A-built Construction Work”) with the height of 2 underground floors and 7 floors above that of 7 floors above the ground that the Defendant ordered by the owner A from the Defendant to the building owner.
B. After May 31, 2013, there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the modification of the contract price of KRW 409,200,000, and around that time, the Plaintiff completed all subcontracted construction works, but only KRW 375,00,000 out of the total contract price by December 30, 2013.
C. In addition, on October 19, 2012, the Plaintiff received a subcontract for 34,650,000 won for the part of tin works among the extension works of the Agricultural Food Processing Research Center (hereinafter “Research Center”) ordered by the Gyeonggi-do Agricultural Technology Institute, and completed each construction work of the Research Center around December 2012, the Plaintiff received only KRW 25,525,737 from the Defendant until May 29, 2013.
2. Determination
A. 1) The Plaintiff asserts that the remaining portion of the construction should be paid KRW 34,200,000, regardless of whether the agreed construction has been paid the completion money from the owner, and the Defendant has not yet arrived since it did not receive the progress payment from the owner. Even if not, the Defendant’s liability should be exempted. 2) First of all, according to the evidence No. 1-1 and No. 2-2, the contract made between the Plaintiff and the Defendant in relation to the method of payment of the above construction cost, stating that the contract made between the Plaintiff and the Defendant in relation to the method of payment of the construction cost was stated as “the amount of the original portion: the nature of the owner; the processing of the direct refusal consent at the request of the owner of the building; and the site site stated as “the payment under the terms of non-payment: the owner of the building.”
However, the expression “a project owner is equivalent to the initial payment” alone.