beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the following additional payment order shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is running the interior business with the trade name of “C”.
The defendant operates a Chinese restaurant in the name of "D".
B. On December 21, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for interior works with respect to D’s interior works (hereinafter “instant construction works”) with a fixed rate of 2/1,000 per day (the construction amount) from December 21, 2015 to January 4, 2016, with respect to the construction amount of KRW 13 million (excluding value-added tax) from the Defendant, and with respect to the construction period of KRW 13 million (value-added tax) from December 21, 2015 to January 4, 2016.
Since then, the Plaintiff was awarded additional contracts from the Defendant to KRW 835,00 (value added tax) for the LED Lighting and Doing Corporation.
C. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 1 million on December 31, 2015, KRW 200,000,000 on January 27, 2016, and KRW 5 million on February 25, 2016.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. Comprehensively taking account of each of the above evidence and evidence as to the cause of the claim, Article 11 of the instant construction contract provides that “the completion of construction works shall be revised, ordered, and constructed before the move-in, if any, after sufficiently reviewing and checking by the defendant, and the defect is found; the plaintiff shall be recognized as completion when the defendant takes over and opens the business under the agreement; the defendant started a DNA restaurant business from January 2016 to January 4, 2016; even according to the defendant’s assertion, the plaintiff’s father was eating food on credit until January 4, 2016.
In light of the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff completed the instant construction work on or around January 4, 2016.
Therefore, the Defendant, who is the contractor, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the contract price of KRW 10,218,50 [including the total contract price of KRW 13,00,000] x 1.5,00,000 (including value added tax) and delay damages.