beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 101,090,302 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from July 1, 2017 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the following three construction works were completed upon the Defendant’s request for construction.
In the case of the Government of the construction cost of the construction project, the sum of KRW 227,54,802, the Defendant deposited KRW 227,54,802, the sum of KRW 50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000:
Amounting to September 1, 2014, KRW 137,100,000,000 on September 4, 2014; KRW 21,000,000 on September 30, 2014; KRW 36,100,000 on October 6, 2014; KRW 20,000 on November 7, 2014; KRW 30,000,000 on November 26, 2014; KRW 137,10,000,000 on the aggregate of KRW 137,00,00,000 on January 222, 2015; the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of the construction cost (27,54,80-27,802-137, 10,000, KRW 105,065 and delay damages).
B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant did not request B construction, and all of the agreed 137,100,000 won was paid to the Corporation, and it did not entrust the Plaintiff with subcontracting.
2. We examine whether each of the instant construction works was concluded between the Defendant Company and the Defendant Company or whether only the authorized construction work was concluded with the Defendant Company.
As the evidence Nos. 1 through 11 and part of witness D’s testimony are acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, in light of the following: (i) the signature of the director of the Defendant Company E was entered in the specifications of the Defendant Company E; and (ii) the head of the Defendant Company sent the Defendant Company F by e-mail the relationship between the Pyeongtaek Construction Work and the e-mail, each of the instant works should be deemed to have been concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company.
Furthermore, in relation to the entire construction amount and the balance of construction works, witness D bears the testimony that there remains up to 100 million won. Furthermore, in full view of the aforementioned evidence, the construction amount and the balance of each construction works of this case are as alleged by the Plaintiff.