beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 129,50,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual 6% from July 30, 2016 to January 25, 2018, and the following.
Reasons
1. Basic facts - A service contract in the attached Form was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. -
After that, the plaintiff completed the service in accordance with the above service contract and submitted its performance to the defendant.
The Defendant prepared, on June 30, 2016, a written confirmation of service payment amounting to KRW 159,500,000 (hereinafter “instant confirmation”) with the service payment of KRW 159,50,000, and issued it to the Plaintiff.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 2 and 3 Evidence
2. Determination
A. Determination 1 on the cause of the claim 1) The Plaintiff’s claim for the unpaid service payment amount of KRW 159,50,000,00 as stated in the written confirmation of this case. Thus, the Defendant shall pay the said money and the damages for delay to the Plaintiff.
B) The Defendant’s assertion - After completing the service, the outcome of the service may be claimed for the cost of the service to pass the inspection of the original owner. However, in the case of the service of design modification, among the service contracts listed in the separate sheet, the Plaintiff performed the service including the working design and the examination, but in fact, the basic design was performed only to the extent of the basic design, and thus failed to pass the inspection of the ordering owner. In addition, in the case of the service of the 2 Indonesia Highway among the service contracts listed in the separate sheet, it was not confirmed that the Plaintiff’s design was finally reflected and passed the inspection of the ordering owner. The service of design improvement plan among the service contracts listed in the separate sheet was not submitted to the Defendant. The Plaintiff’s claim for the service payment related to the service Nos. 1, 2, and 10 among the service contracts listed in the separate sheet is without merit. - The Defendant’s preparation of the confirmation document of this case is only prepared by the Plaintiff’s request to submit it in the process of receiving the loan from the financial institution.