물품대금 반환 청구의 소
1. The defendant's appeal and the claim for return of provisional payment are all dismissed.
2. The return of appeal costs and provisional payments.
1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, given that the reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the entry or addition as follows.
2. The phrase “A” and each “D” in the grounds of the judgment of the first instance court on the parts which are timely or added shall be changed to “Plaintiff.”
On June 20, 2014, the first instance court's second page 8 supplied "..... the Plaintiff paid 214,945,500 won to the Defendant on June 20, 2014," and the Seoul Central District Court in the third page of the same section was "Seoul Rehabilitation Court," and the Plaintiff was "B," respectively.
Then, following the second sentence of the first instance court’s judgment, “The above court rendered a decision to discontinue rehabilitation procedures on July 17, 2017, and the Plaintiff took over the proceedings of this case again.”
Part 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance, from Part 9 to Part 12 of the same page, shall be as follows.
In full view of the following circumstances, given that the parties to the instant goods supply contract are recognized as original and Defendant, given that the parties to the instant goods supply contract are recognized as either a party or Defendant, it is difficult to accept the Defendant’s assertion that differs from the foregoing premise. ① On June 20, 2014, the Defendant’s electronic tax invoice pursuant to the instant goods supply contract (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”) is deemed to be the Plaintiff on June 20, 2014.
A. The Plaintiff issued the goods and paid KRW 214,945,50 to the Defendant on the same day.
In addition, after the agreement was terminated, the Defendant issued revised electronic tax invoices on October 28, 2014. From October 28, 2014 to January 15, 2015, the Defendant returned KRW 114,945,500, which was part of the price of the goods, to the Plaintiff four times.
The appearance of such a series of acts and transactions by the plaintiff and the defendant.