beta
Text
1. All claims filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the counterclaim claims filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.
2...
Reasons
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. On May 31, 2013, the Plaintiff was awarded a contract with the Defendant for the repair works, including the cost of construction 39,600,000 won (including value-added tax 3,600,000) and the construction period from May 21, 2013 to June 30, 2013 (the subsequent construction period was changed from August 30, 2013 to August 30, 2013). ② The Plaintiff received a request for the repair works including the cost of construction 8,580,000,000 (including value-added tax 780,000, value-added tax), and the period of construction from May 21, 2013 to June 30, 2013.
B. The Plaintiff’s repair work from around June 4, 2013, and B’s repair work from around June 7, 2013.
C. On July 31, 2013, the Plaintiff claimed KRW 23,760,00 and KRW 8,580,000 for B repair work costs and KRW 15,840,00 for B Repair work costs on September 30, 2013. The Plaintiff claimed KRW 15,840,000 for repair work costs on September 30, 2013. The Defendant paid KRW 23,760,000 for B Repair work costs and KRW 8,580,000 for B Repair work costs and KRW 32,340,000 for B Repair work costs on August 26, 2013, and paid KRW 10,840,000 for the remainder while the instant lawsuit is pending.
【Ground of recognition】 Evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 23-1 to 3, respectively, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the main claim
A. The plaintiff's claim for construction cost (i.e., the plaintiff's claim is the primary claim of this case, and at the time of the repair work, the defendant requested the plaintiff to perform the additional construction as stated in the table 1 below, and revised the process with the defendant's erroneous work instruction. At the time of the repair work, the defendant requested the plaintiff to perform the additional construction as stated in the table 2 below, and the defendant claimed that the plaintiff performed it