logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.08.31 2017가단13960
공사대금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 38,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from July 7, 2017 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

Basic Facts

A. On May 11, 2015, the Defendant, who runs the business in the name of “C”, concluded a contract with the Plaintiff Company stipulating that the construction cost of the instant construction work is KRW 95 million (excluding value-added tax) on the part of the Plaintiff Company. (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. According to the instant contract, the Defendant determined to pay the Plaintiff the down payment of KRW 19 million (excluding value-added tax) to the Plaintiff on May 19, 2015, ② the progress payment of KRW 47.5 million (excluding value-added tax) within seven days after the completion of the construction, and ③ the remainder of KRW 28.5 million (excluding value-added tax) within seven days after the start-up.

C. The Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 19 million on May 19, 2015, and KRW 47.5 million on June 23, 2015, respectively.

[Reasons for Recognition] According to the contract of this case, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 5 and 6 (including serial numbers in the case of provisional serial numbers), and judgment as to the cause of claim for judgment as to the whole purport of the pleadings, the plaintiff completed all of the construction work of this case after completing the construction work of this case and completing the construction work of this case under the contract of this case. Therefore, in full view of the whole purport of pleadings as to the records Nos. 5 and 6, the defendant prepared a confirmation document to the effect that the delivery and installation of the construction of this case was completed on April 19, 2018, and a confirmation document to the effect that the trial operation is completed on the completion of the construction of this case. According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to confirm that the plaintiff completed the trial operation under the contract of this case, and the above recognition can not be followed only by the statements of Eul Nos. 1 through 4, 7, 99 (including serial numbers), and the above confirmation document No. 80 days after the completion date of the confirmation.

arrow