beta
Text
1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally serve as KRW 98,635,000 on the Plaintiff and as a result, from July 1, 2016 to December 29, 2016.
Reasons
1. Determination on the plaintiff's claim for refund of processing work costs
A. Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On January 30, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff sought compensation for the amount equivalent to the above work cost since the Plaintiff requested the main product processing work between the Defendants, who are partners, and paid the Defendants the work cost of KRW 46,80,00,00 to the Defendants, but the Defendants spent the above work cost in excess of the above work cost due to the Defendants’ failure to perform the processing work. Therefore, the following facts may be acknowledged by the evidence No. 1-2, No. 2, No. 2, No. 2, and No. 6-1, No. 6-2, No. 1, No. 3, No. 7,8, and No. 9, respectively. (A) The Plaintiff is a personal business operator engaged in the gold-type vehicle parts manufacturing business under the trade name of “D,” and the Defendants jointly concluded a contract between the Defendants and the Defendants on Jan. 30, 2015 with the aforementioned work cost of KRW 30,000.
C) However, due to the Defendants’ nonperformance of the above processing work, the Plaintiff paid KRW 38,635,000 to the Plaintiff. 3) If so, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 38,635,00,00, which is the amount of damages suffered by the Plaintiff due to the Defendants’ nonperformance of the processing work.
The plaintiff's remaining claims are without merit, since there is no evidence to prove the damages in excess.
B. As to the determination of the Defendants’ assertion, the Defendants agreed on processing costs of KRW 80,00,000 and received only KRW 46,800,000 in relation to the above processing work, the Defendants did not receive KRW 33,200,000 as well as KRW 20,000 in relation to the above processing work. As such, the Defendants did not receive KRW 33,200,000 in relation to the above processing work, each of the above amounts should be paid from the Plaintiff, and there is a maximum amount of additional costs related to the previous work, but they asserted that KRW 53,200,000 in relation to the above amount exists as prescribed in subparagraph 1.