beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The relationship 1) The Plaintiff is operating a restaurant in the name of “D restaurant” in Jeju City. 2) The Defendant, a company conducting tin construction work, etc., which was subcontracted from the Hosung Construction Co., Ltd. part of tin construction work among E hotel construction work.
The defendant further subcontracted the above work to F, and F performed the work with the person employed by him.
(hereinafter “instant construction project”). (b)
From September 2016 to April 2017, the Plaintiff agreed to provide meals to F and his/her husbands, who perform the instant construction work, and receive meal costs from F at the end of the month. However, the Plaintiff was unable to receive meal costs of KRW 17,500,00 (i.e., KRW 11,50,000 on February 2, 2017) (i.e., KRW 4,453,00 on April 1, 2017).
C. F prepared a written confirmation that the Plaintiff did not pay KRW 11,500,000 to the Plaintiff on April 21, 2017 and KRW 1,547,000 to the Plaintiff.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant confirmation”). D.
F’s escape and the Defendant’s additional statement 1) AF escaped after receiving the additional progress payment of KRW 100 million from the Defendant, and on April 23, 2017, the Defendant’s representative director G and the human father employed by the F discussed the measures to gather in the Plaintiff’s restaurant on the same page. 2) On the same page, the Defendant’s representative director G stated “5/11 G” at the bottom of the instant confirmation and signed “B” and stated “B” next.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-3 evidence, Eul 1 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The defendant signed the letter of confirmation of this case within the meaning that he would pay the plaintiff the meal cost not paid by F.
The defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the meal cost of KRW 17,500,000 and damages for delay.
B. The Defendant’s signing of the instant confirmation document was merely the purport to confirm the cost of meals that F did not pay.