beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part against the Plaintiff falling under the part ordering additional payment under paragraph 2 below.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 25, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction works with the Defendant and Chungcheong Budget-gun C and D-based multi-household housing (114,720,000 won for 286.8 square meters for 114,720,000 won for C-owned land and 86,600,000 won for 216.5 square meters for C-owned land) for C-owned land; and the corporation at the crime prevention guard (15 x 150,570,000 won for 203,570,000 won per day (=14,720,000 won for 86,60,000 won for 286,600,250,000 won for construction works).
B. From Jun. 1, 2012 to Nov. 11, 2012, the Plaintiff completed the said framework construction, and for five days, the Plaintiff, E, and F three persons completed the said foundation construction (hereinafter “the instant foundation construction”).
C. The Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the subcontractor G entered into a direct payment agreement with respect to the construction cost unpaid after July 2012, and the Defendant paid the construction cost of KRW 30,300,000 to G 16 times from June 4, 2012 to January 28, 2014 pursuant to the said agreement.
2. The parties' assertion
A. Of the Plaintiff’s assertion of construction cost of KRW 203,570,000, the money directly received from the Defendant is merely KRW 109,300,000.
In addition, if the Defendant deducteds KRW 31.3 million paid to G, KRW 3.5 million paid to E, and KRW 2.4 million paid to H, and KRW 61,300,00 in total, KRW 61,300,000 (= KRW 3.3 million in total, KRW 2.5 million in total) granted to H, the Defendant should additionally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 32,970,000 (= KRW 203,570,000 in total – KRW 109,300,000 in total – KRW 61,300,000 in total, KRW 2.5 million in total).
B. The Defendant asserted that KRW 130,450,000, out of the construction cost of this case, was directly paid to the Plaintiff.
3. The issues at issue and in the judgment of the trial court are whether the amount that the Defendant paid directly to the Plaintiff among the construction cost of this case reaches KRW 130,450,00,000, which exceeds KRW 32,970,000, which the Plaintiff is the Plaintiff. The evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to acknowledge it, and it is otherwise recognized.