beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 49,03,424 as well as 6% per annum from November 28, 2017 to September 14, 2018, respectively, to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Chief;
A. Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On May 15, 2016, the Plaintiff determined the construction period as the construction contract (including value-added tax) with respect to the design construction works of the Defendant and Busan Shipping Daegu C building from June 1, 2016, July 25, 2016, and the construction cost of KRW 451,00,000 (including value-added tax) (hereinafter “instant construction contract or the instant construction contract”).
(2) The Defendant agreed to pay 10% interest per annum on the instant construction cost of KRW 451,00,000,000, the payment of the instant construction cost of KRW 50 million on May 30, 2016, the intermediate payment of KRW 31,000,000 on August 20, 2016, and KRW 91,00,000 on November 30, 2016, and the remainder of KRW 91,000 on November 30, 2016.
However, the defendant did not pay 81 million won of the above balance on the date of payment, and paid 40 million won on November 27, 2017.
3) The Defendant calculated the unpaid amount of delay damages (A) and the Defendant paid the remainder of KRW 81 million by November 30, 2016, which is the due date, KRW 40 million on November 27, 2017. As such, the damages for delay during the said period are KRW 8,033,424 (i.e., KRW 81 million).
B) Therefore, the total amount of the instant construction cost that the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff is KRW 89,03,424 (i.e., KRW 81 million). If the Defendant deducts KRW 400,00,00,000, it shall be KRW 49,033,424. Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 49,03,424 and the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from November 28, 2017 to the date of full payment.
B. Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant merely lent only the name of Nonparty D, etc. with respect to the instant construction contract, and the Plaintiff also knew or was grossly negligent with regard to the fact of the name lending, and thus, the Defendant did not have a duty to pay the instant construction cost. 2) In relation to the conclusion of the instant construction contract, the Defendant is obligated to make rebates to Nonparty E.