물품대금
1. Defendant B Co., Ltd. shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 174,497,00 and 20% per annum from January 3, 2015 to the date of full payment.
1. As to the determination on the claim against Defendant B, the Plaintiff supplied the instant product to Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) from November 1, 2014 to December 13, 2014. Since the outstanding amount was not in dispute between the parties, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 174,497,000 for the outstanding amount and delay damages at a rate of 20% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from January 3, 2015 to the date of full payment, following the delivery of a copy of the instant complaint to the Plaintiff after the final supply date.
2. As to the claim against Defendant C, the Plaintiff asserts that Defendant C is a de facto employer as a director of the Defendant Company, and promised to pay the price for the goods of the Defendant Company, and that the registration of the right to collateral security and right to transfer ownership was made in the name of the representative director of the Plaintiff regarding the real estate owned by Defendant C, and that Defendant C is jointly and severally liable for payment of the price for the goods that
According to the statement No. 7-1 and No. 7-2, Defendant C, the representative director of the Plaintiff, established the registration of the right to collateral security and the right to claim transfer of ownership on the real estate owned by the Defendant C. However, such circumstance alone agreed that Defendant C, the legal entity of which is separate from the Defendant Company, shall take over and repay the obligation to purchase the goods of the Defendant Company, the legal entity, as well as the obligation to guarantee real property.
The plaintiff's above assertion is without merit, since it is difficult to view it as joint and several liability, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant company is justified, and the claim against the defendant C is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.