beta
Text
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 27,727,273 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its amount from January 21, 2014 to November 21, 2014.
Reasons
1. The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed to exist;
A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in the glass machine automation business, etc. with the trade name of “C,” and the Defendant is a person engaged in the eroding manufacturing business, etc. with the trade name of “D.”
The construction work-type 1) TILTING TBL 1 SE 2) LOADING MVG MVIN COM 1 SET 3) HV 1 SE (MoE 5) HVE 1 SE 5) HVIN PY 5) HHP 1 SE 6) ECE 1 ST 1 SET 3) EFF 1 construction period from May 31, 2013 to July 13, 2013, the remainder of the construction work price and construction price payment under the terms and conditions, value-added tax, value-added tax, value-added tax, value-added tax, value-added tax, value-added tax, 727, 27277, 800,000 after the remainder of the construction work, the Defendant shall pay the remainder to the Plaintiff as the intermediate payment, the remainder of the construction work price and the remainder of the construction price to the Plaintiff as KRW 3600,300,00.
B. On May 31, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the following construction works (hereinafter “instant construction works”) (hereinafter “instant contract”).
C. On August 8, 2013, the Plaintiff received KRW 30 million out of the construction cost from the Defendant, and on September 3, 2013, issued and delivered a written confirmation (Evidence A2) that “the instant construction was completed” from the Defendant’s factory head E.
The Plaintiff received KRW 7 million from the Defendant on October 15, 2013, and KRW 8 million on January 2014, respectively.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including each number in the case of additional number), witness E's partial testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the main claim
A. (i) On May 31, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into the instant contract with the Defendant on May 31, 2013, and the Plaintiff entered into the said contract.
9.3. The fact that the facility of this case was delivered to the Defendant is as set out in the above basic facts.
The responsibility to assert and prove the completion of the work in the contract is to pay remuneration for the result of the work.