beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 22,059,982 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from November 1, 2015 to October 5, 2018.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. In order to transfer the business, the Defendant, who sells Buddhist products, purchased three-story buildings on the ground C, Daegu-gu, which are public bath buildings (hereinafter “instant building”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer.
B. The Defendant intended to undertake the instant building construction project to alter the building to the sales of Buddhist goods and residential purpose. Accordingly, the Plaintiff submitted the first written estimate with the construction cost of KRW 131,93,760 (Additional dues), but submitted the second written estimate with the reduction of the construction cost of KRW 123,117,895 (Additional dues) and then again submitted the third written estimate with the reduction of the construction cost of KRW 110,010,45 (hereinafter “third written estimate”) on August 25, 2015.
C. On August 29, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant set the construction cost of the instant building at KRW 110,000,000 (excluding surtax) in accordance with the written estimate on August 29, 2015, and “the instant construction work” below “the instant construction work.
(D) The Plaintiff concluded a contract. By October 25, 2015, the construction of the instant construction project and the construction specifications of the attached table of other construction works were completed. E. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 90,000,000 as the construction cost of the instant construction project. [Grounds for recognition] The Defendant did not dispute any dispute, Party A’s evidence Nos. 1, 56, 7, 9, 13 (including the serial number, as indicated in Party B’s evidence No. 1, and the purport of the entire pleadings.
2. The party's assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) was not paid KRW 20 million among the construction cost of the instant case. The Plaintiff and the Defendant specified the construction cost of KRW 20 million and added the construction cost of KRW 847,540, and the second floor 88,847,540. Accordingly, the remainder of the construction cost to be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff is KRW 48,847,540 (= KRW 20 million) and the construction cost of the defective construction cost of KRW 2,393,60 is KRW 40.
Therefore, the Defendant’s KRW 46,453,940 (=48,847,540) - 2,393,600) and the Plaintiff.