물품대금
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 5,367,350 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from August 18, 2015 to May 13, 2016; and (b) May 14, 2016 for the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff, which runs a wholesale and retail business of building equipment, etc. under the trade name of “C”, has supplied the Defendant, who runs the business under the trade name of “D” (hereinafter “instant supply contract”). The unpaid amount of goods is KRW 20,426,200 as of April 6, 201.
B. The Defendant repaid to the Plaintiff KRW 10 million on February 12, 2014, and KRW 1,225,00 on October 1, 2014, respectively.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 9,201,200 (20,426,200 - KRW 10 million - KRW 1,225,00) as the price for the goods, barring special circumstances.
3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. As of July 17, 2013, the Defendant asserted that the amount of the goods unpaid under the instant supply contract is KRW 16,592,350 as of July 17, 201, and according to the overall purport of the entry and pleadings in the evidence No. 5, the Defendant, even after April 6, 2011, has settled the price of the goods while continuing transactions under the instant supply contract with the Plaintiff, and can be recognized the fact that the amount of the goods unpaid under the instant supply contract is 16,592,350 as of July 17, 2013. Thus, the Defendant’s aforementioned assertion is with merit.
B. On July 14, 2015, the Defendant asserted that E was unable to comply with the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that the Defendant received a seizure and collection order regarding the claim for the amount of goods unpaid under the instant supply contract with the Defendant as the obligor and the Defendant as the third obligor, thereby having the Defendant as the Defendant as the Defendant, and thus, cannot comply with the Plaintiff’s claim. However, the above circumstance alone alone does not prevent the Plaintiff’s claim. Therefore, the Defendant’s claim is without merit.
4. Accordingly, the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff KRW 5,367,350 ( KRW 16,592,350 - KRW 10 million - KRW 1,225,00) and this case as to the plaintiff.