beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.09.14 2016가단45341

추심금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff: (a) based on the executory exemplification of the payment order issued by the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2016 tea16451 (hereinafter “Seoul Central District Court”); and (b) based on the executory order for the purchase of goods, the Plaintiff received the bond attachment and collection order issued by the Incheon District Court 2016TTT14046 (hereinafter “Seoul District Court”); and (c) on June 17, 2016, the above bond attachment and collection order were served on the Defendant, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the money stated in

2. Determination

A. It is insufficient to recognize the existence of the claims for collection by the Plaintiff solely with the descriptions in the evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

B. Rather, comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions and arguments in subparagraphs B through 5, the subcontract agreement between the Defendant and D as of October 27, 2015 was terminated on December 17, 2015, prior to the delivery of the instant collection order to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant refusal of construction”). The Defendant is only able to recognize only the fact that the said subcontract was newly concluded with FF Co., Ltd. on December 17, 2015 with respect to the said construction.

As to this, the Plaintiff asserts that the waiver of the construction work of this case is null and void by a false agreement between the Defendant and D, or by an abuse of G’s representative authority, which is the representative director of D. However, it is insufficient to recognize the Plaintiff’s above assertion solely on the ground that D and the representative director of D are the same person G, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.