logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.05.16 2016가단259305
공사대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The Plaintiff (1) concluded a contract with the Defendant to complete the said construction work by setting the cost of the glass project as KRW 122,842,250 (excluding value-added tax) among the remodeling works for the apartment remodeling project operated by the Defendant.

(2) The Plaintiff issued, at the request of the Defendant, a tax invoice of KRW 200 million (including value-added tax) to the Defendant for a bank loan.

(3) The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 17,842,250 and value-added tax on the said tax invoice plus KRW 36,024,068.

B. The Defendant awarded a contract to the Plaintiff for the construction cost of KRW 200 million (including value-added tax) and paid all the above KRW 200 million.

2. The Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of KRW 200,000 (including value-added tax) to the Defendant regarding the above glass construction, and there is no dispute between the parties, and as examined below, it is reasonable to 200,000,00 won for the construction cost of the above glass construction in light of the circumstances where the construction cost paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff exceeds KRW 200,000,000,000,000,000,000

However, the fact that the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 20 million with the price of the aforementioned glass construction work, KRW 5 million on December 1, 2015, KRW 5 million on January 18, 2016, and KRW 10 million on May 26, 2016 does not conflict between the parties, and that the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 175 million additionally to the Plaintiff on February 4, 2016, considering the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement in subparagraph 1.

(A) The Plaintiff, on February 5, 2016, paid the construction cost of KRW 70 million, out of the total amount of KRW 175 million as of February 5, 2016. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant’s total amount of the construction cost paid to the Plaintiff exceeds KRW 200 million, on the premise that there exists unpaid construction cost or value-added tax.

arrow