beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.04.09 2019가단9722

물품대금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 32,746,850 and the interest rate of KRW 12% per annum from September 12, 2019 to the date of complete payment.

Reasons

From December 2018, the Plaintiff

7. Until June 26, 2019, continuous supply of food materials, such as Nowon-gu and other goods, to Defendant (C Co., Ltd.) on credit. Since April 2, 2019, Defendant was not fully paid the price of the food materials on credit from Defendant since then on April 2, 2019, and if calculated by the supply portion on July 26, 2019, the amount of the unpaid food materials on credit reaches KRW 32,746,850 in total, may be recognized by adding the whole purport of the pleadings as stated in the evidence A and 4.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above KRW 32,746,850 as well as damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from September 12, 2019 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case.

As to this, the defendant alleged to the effect that the part of the price for the food materials that occurred before June 21, 2019, other than KRW 5,106,650 (the remaining amount after deducting KRW 4,00,000 paid by the defendant on August 2, 2019 from the aggregate of the sales slips of KRW 9,106,650 (the remaining amount after deducting KRW 4,00,000 paid by the defendant on August 2, 2019) was paid in full. In light of the fact that the tax invoice for the food materials issued by the plaintiff on January 2 through May 5, 2019, the defendant stated that the payment of the food materials for the plaintiff's claim cannot be recognized as correct because the plaintiff cannot be recognized as accurate as the payment of the food materials for the plaintiff's claim based on evidence on the credit materials. However, since each of the above statements in subparagraphs 1, 2, and 2 are difficult to admit the facts of the plaintiff's assertion, it is difficult to accept.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.