beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.12.06 2016나8732

외상매출금등

Text

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.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that manufactures and sells hydrogen and other gas, and the Defendant is a company that manufactures and sells gas.

B. Since 1986, “A” was established as the Defendant corporation on November 5, 2014, while engaging in a business as an individual entrepreneur, and the Plaintiff continued to sell gas to the Defendant even after the establishment of “A” as the Defendant corporation.

C. The Plaintiff traded a container owned by the Plaintiff in the form of lending the container containing gas to the Defendant and return the empty container from the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 3 through 7 evidence, Eul's 1 evidence (including number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of whole pleading

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant is obligated to return 40.2 liter gas containers and 116 and 162 gas containers and 46.7 liter gas containers (hereinafter “instant gas containers”) as indicated in the separate sheet among the containers leased by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant gas containers”). If it is impossible to return them, the Defendant is obligated to pay money converted by the rate of each unit price per each gas container listed in the same list.

B. The Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion was mistakenly calculated that the Defendant was additionally lent 162 gas containers from the Plaintiff due to the error in the process of calculating the remaining amount due to the Plaintiff’s shipment (a container leased by the Plaintiff to the Defendant) and the storage (a container returned by the Defendant to the Plaintiff), and thus, the Defendant did not return the gas containers to the Plaintiff.

3. According to each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, and 9, the defendant's written confirmation of sales and containers of this case (hereinafter "written confirmation of this case") prepared to the effect that 162 gas containers of this case have not yet been returned.