beta
Text
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 22,50,000 as well as 6% per annum from May 26, 2016 to September 21, 2016 and the next day.
Reasons
Facts of recognition
A. On February 20, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to sell to the Defendant for approximately KRW 12,500, a total of KRW 101,250,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), which the Plaintiff cultivated in approximately 8,100 square meters and approximately 12,50,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). On February 26, 2016, the Plaintiff was paid the down payment to the Defendant for the remainder of KRW 51,250,000 from the end of February 26, 2016 and the remainder of KRW 51,250,000 from the Defendant until February 2016.
B. Although the Defendant harvested approximately KRW 70% of the large wave subject to the instant sales contract during the period from February 2016 to March 10, 2016, it did not pay the Plaintiff any balance under the instant sales contract.
C. On March 31, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant corrected the instant sales contract amount of KRW 92,500,000 and received KRW 10,000 from the Defendant, and agreed to receive the remainder of KRW 32,50,000 within four days after the completion of work.
On April 18, 2016, the Defendant harvested all of the large waves subject to the instant sales contract, and paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff around June 18, 2016.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Entry of Evidence Nos. 1 and 2 of Evidence No. 1-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendant sought from the Plaintiff the remainder amount of KRW 22,50,000 under the instant sales contract [the amount of KRW 92,50,000 (the amount of KRW 50,000,000 paid around March 31, 2016)] and the amount of KRW 10,000,000 paid around June 18, 2016 (the amount of KRW 10,000,000 paid around June 18, 2016)], as the Plaintiff seeks, from May 26, 2016, it is apparent that it is the day following the delivery of the copy of the instant complaint to the Defendant as sought by the Plaintiff as a result of the remaining payment date under the instant sales contract. However, it is reasonable for the Plaintiff to claim a dispute as to the existence and scope of the Defendant’s obligation to perform the contract from May 26, 2016.
this judgment, which is deemed to have been held.