beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 49,874,00 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from December 4, 2012 to January 17, 2013.
Reasons
1. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 12, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff was requested from the defendant to December 2, 2012 and the defendant to produce goods (Dek & Stirs & Group report, Slides Pate base) and then manufactured goods worth KRW 45,200,000 in accordance with the design drawings amended on December 3, 2012 from November 14, 2012 to December 26, 2012, and supplied the goods to the defendant on or after December 3, 2012. The defendant asserted that the plaintiff accepted the goods from the plaintiff, separately, that the goods were manufactured and supplied to the defendant around 1,80,000,000 won for defects in inferior items.
Therefore, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 49,874,00 won for the production of goods (=(45,200,000 won-1,800,000 won) x 1.12,134,00 won) and the amount calculated by applying the rate of 5% per annum as requested by the plaintiff from December 4, 2012 to January 17, 2013 when the application for the alteration of the lawsuit in this case was delivered to the defendant from the next day of the supply of the goods to the day of full payment.
2. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant asserts that there was almost little reason to increase the manufacturing price following the modification of the drawing, and that the Plaintiff did not submit the materials cost and labor cost modification according to the modified drawing. Therefore, the Defendant cannot accept the price for manufacturing goods other than KRW 28,069,00,000.
However, according to the evidence and reference documents submitted by the Plaintiff, the fact of the Plaintiff’s assertion can be sufficiently recognized, and the evidence alone submitted by the Defendant lacks to reverse the above fact of recognition, and there is no other evidence supporting the Defendant’s assertion
The defendant's assertion is not accepted.
3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable.