물품대금
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff supplied alcoholic beverages to the Defendant from before 2011 to June 2014. The amount of goods that had not been paid by the Defendant is KRW 25,830,733.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the above 25,830,733 won and damages for delay to the plaintiff.
B. Defendant 1) The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the same amount of unpaid goods prior to the instant lawsuit, but confirmed that there was no balance of the attempted amount and withdrawn the lawsuit thereafter, which constitutes a double claim, and thus, is unlawful. 2) Moreover, the materials unilaterally prepared by the Plaintiff cannot be deemed as having been proven as long as the Defendant’s payment of the unpaid goods was not sufficiently reliable. Rather, since the Defendant already paid the Plaintiff the amount exceeding the total liquor amount supplied by the Plaintiff, there is no unpaid goods.
2. We examine the judgment of the Defendant on this case’s defense since the Defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as a double claim.
Article 259 of the Civil Procedure Act provides, “The parties shall not institute any lawsuit again for the case pending in the court,” and Article 267(2) of the same Act provides, “The person who withdraws a lawsuit subsequent to the final judgment on the merits of the case shall not institute any same lawsuit.”
On March 10, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the claim for the payment of goods (hereinafter “previous lawsuit”) with the same content as the instant lawsuit under this court’s 2015dada8954, and on April 22, 2015, the fact that the lawsuit was withdrawn on April 22, 2015 is significant in this court, recognized by the overall purport of pleadings, and the Plaintiff again filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant on October 26, 2015 is apparent in the record.
According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff is above before the final judgment of the previous lawsuit is rendered.