beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 73,00,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 6% from May 16, 2014 to September 10, 2018, and the following.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. 1) The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur who manufactures windows, etc. with the trade name D. (2) In around 2008, the Defendant was awarded a contract from E for the construction of a 4-story building on the land surface of 568.1 square meters in Asan-si, Busan-si, and subcontracted the part of the Changho Construction among the above construction to the Plaintiff.
(4) On May 16, 2013, the Defendant prepared a certificate stating that “the construction price of KRW 73 million shall be paid by May 15, 2014,” and the Defendant’s trade name was changed from “G Co., Ltd.” to “C Co., Ltd.” on February 25, 2016) to “new building” and “the construction price of KRW 73 million shall be paid by May 15, 2014.”
(Evidence A) 3. [Evidence A] without dispute, entry of Evidence A Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the construction price of KRW 73 million and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum as stipulated in the Commercial Act from May 16, 2014 to September 10, 2018, which was served on the Defendant with a duplicate of the complaint in this case, and 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of full payment.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. 1) The Defendant completed a new building, but failed to receive the construction cost from E, the owner of the building, and thus, the Plaintiff, the subcontractor, could not be paid the construction cost. Meanwhile, in the instant case, H, the obligee, filed a lawsuit against E and the Defendant for ownership transfer registration under the Daejeon District Court Branch Branch Decision 201Gadan3356, and there was a mediation to sell subparagraph I of the new building to a third party and pay to the Defendant the remainder after deducting the amount of KRW 150 million from the sale price. 2) The Defendant’s claim against H, recognized under the said conciliation protocol, as the said protocol, against the Plaintiff on May 16, 2013.