Receivables Recovery Assistance | Approximately 200 Million Won in Receivables, Fully Recovered Through Litigation

This is the account of a client who requested help with recovering an outstanding receivable.

The client is a company specializing in the manufacture and installation of equipment, and the client performed work after being subcontracted by the defendant for part of the process equipment construction at an industrial facility.

The defendant subcontracted two separate equipment works to the client on two occasions, and the parties contracted by clearly setting the contract amount and scope of work for each project.

The client completed all of the work within the set period and received part of the corresponding payment.

However, part of the remaining construction payment for the first project was not paid, so the client issued a tax invoice for the unpaid amount and sent it to the defendant.

However, the defendant received it without any particular objection and yet ultimately did not pay the remaining amount.

Accordingly, the client decided to file a legal lawsuit to recover the outstanding receivable and requested help from a debt collection attorney with experience in numerous construction payment cases.

The debt collection attorney first argued that the construction contract in this case had been clearly concluded and that the client had performed in accordance with the terms of the contract.

The defendant contracted out the first construction and the second construction in this case to the client in the amounts of 600 million won and 500 million won, respectively.

The contents of this contract, namely the fact that the contract was concluded, are objectively and clearly confirmed through the estimate, the purchase order, the construction breakdown, the settlement materials in line with the progress of construction, and the tax invoice issued after the completion of construction.

The client completed all of the construction within the scope set in the contract within the set construction period, and the defendant acknowledged the fact of completion and paid part of the amount due.

In addition, the fact that the defendant received the tax invoice issued by the client for the unpaid amount means that the defendant was also aware of the existence of the debt.

Accordingly, the debt collection attorney argued that the client had faithfully performed all obligations under the contract and that the current claim for the remaining outstanding amount was justified.

The defendant argues, in effect, that the client violated a duty of disclosure under the principle of good faith in the course of this contract, and seeks to evade the obligation to pay the price.

The debt collection specialist attorney emphasized that the defendant's argument was without merit and could not be recognized in law, for the following reasons.

▶The existence of a specific duty of disclosure and the fact of its violation are themselves not recognized

-The defendant argues that the client bore a duty of disclosure regarding the contents of the contract or external circumstances and violated it

→ The client faithfully performed the scope of work under the contract with the defendant, and there were no changes during the construction process and no special circumstances that would affect the result of the construction

In addition, the defendant received and reviewed all materials issued by the client, including the construction statement, progress reports, tax invoices, and result reports, and raised no particular objection during the construction period