물품대금
1. Defendant A Co., Ltd.: KRW 70,80,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 6% from November 7, 2014 to August 20, 2015.
1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 as to the claims against Defendant A corporation (hereinafter “Defendant A”), the Plaintiff entered into a commodity supply contract with the Defendant on September 5, 2014 with respect to “AL voltage” and supplied goods to Defendant A, and the fact that the price for the goods that the Plaintiff failed to receive was 708 million won for the goods that were not received as of October 31, 2014 is recognized.
Therefore, Defendant A is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the price of the goods unpaid to the Plaintiff KRW 70.8 million and damages for delay.
Although Defendant A asserts that there is a defect in the product supplied to the Plaintiff, there is no evidence to acknowledge it.
2. As to the claim against the defendant B
A. The Plaintiff asserts that “Defendant B, as the representative director of Defendant A, promised to pay the goods at the time of the above contract for the supply of goods, and thus, he is jointly and severally liable with Defendant A to pay the said goods.”
However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that Defendant B had undertaken the above commitment.
B. In addition, the Plaintiff asserts that “Defendant B is jointly and severally liable to pay the price of goods according to the legal doctrine of denial of legal personality.”
However, the mere fact that Defendant B is the representative director of Defendant A cannot be deemed to have abused the legal personality of Defendant A with respect to the instant transaction, and any other circumstance to recognize it cannot be found.
3. Conclusion: (a) From November 7, 2014, Defendant A sought payment of KRW 70,80,000 to the Plaintiff from October 31, 2014, the date following the due date for payment, for delay from October 31, 2014, which is the date of the final supply of the goods; (b) however, the instant contract stipulates that the payment shall be made within six days after delivery (Article 2). Accordingly, Defendant A can only recognize delay liability from November 7, 2014.
The defendant A shall be paid 6% per annum under the Commercial Act and the next day from the date of this decision, if it is deemed reasonable to dispute the existence or scope of the obligation.