beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.22 2017나22437

물품대금 등 청구의 소

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. As to the instant case cited in the judgment of the court of first instance, this court’s reasoning is identical to the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for deletion or addition as follows (2). Thus, this court’s reasoning is acceptable pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. A part which is used or added for deletion or cutting;

A. The deletion part of the judgment of the court of first instance is to delete the part from 9 to 13.

In the fifth judgment of the court of first instance, “The Defendant entered into the instant sales agency contract” of the first instance judgment, “The Defendant, at the time of entering into the instant sales agency contract or around August 2014, at the time of entering into the sales agency contract of this case, at the time of settling accounts for July of the same year according to the instant sales agency contract of this case.”

A. The court below held that “76,334,444 won” was “76,274,144 won” and “76,274,144 won.”

In addition, “A evidence Nos. 4 through 8” in Section 7 of the Part I added “A No. 11” to the following. The following is added between the 7th and 4. In addition, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit since the Plaintiff’s payment to the Plaintiff on October 8, 2014 was not an advance payment for the goods supplied by the Plaintiff in the future but an investment that the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff at the time of requesting an additional production of goods. Thus, the Plaintiff is not obligated to return it to the Defendant. However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff paid KRW 120,00,000 to the Plaintiff as an investment payment, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.”

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.