beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 29,700,000 for the Plaintiff and the following: 5% per annum from May 22, 2015 to November 12, 2015.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Defendant was awarded a subcontract for the instant construction work from SungS&D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “S&D”), which is performed under a contract with Gosisisisi-si (hereinafter “D”) for D (hereinafter “instant construction”) located in Kusi-si (hereinafter “instant construction”).
B. The Defendant, while performing the instant construction, set the price of KRW 33,00,000 (including value-added tax) to the Plaintiff and requested the production and supply of households, etc. to be installed at the D points.
C. On April 3, 2015, the Plaintiff completed the production and supply of households.
On June 8, 2015, the defendant paid KRW 3,300,000 to the plaintiff, and the remainder is not yet paid.
[Reasons for Recognition] A’s 1-3 evidence, Gap’s 5-10 evidence, Gap’s 12-15 evidence, Gap’s 19 evidence, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 29,700,000 (=33,000,000 - 3,000,000) and damages for delay calculated at each rate of 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc. from May 22, 2015 to November 12, 2015, for which the Plaintiff seeks from May 2, 2015 to the date when the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the Defendant.
B. As to the Defendant’s argument, the Defendant asserted that, although the Defendant lent the name of the Defendant to E, the conclusion of the contract with the Plaintiff is not the Defendant.
However, in full view of the following circumstances, the parties who entered into a contract with the Plaintiff can sufficiently recognize that they are the Defendant, taking into account each of the above evidence, Gap evidence Nos. 16, 17, Gap evidence Nos. 22, and Gap evidence Nos. 24, and the whole purport of the pleadings. Thus, the defendant's argument is without merit.
① Before the Plaintiff supplies the furniture to the D branch, the drawing of the D branch is as follows.