beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.03.30 2015가단41715

물품대금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 22,636,200, and KRW 5% per annum from January 30, 2016 to March 30, 2017, and complete payment from the next day.

Reasons

As to the cause of claim, the Plaintiff supplied goods, such as C, to the Defendant from October 2014 to February 2015, and the unpaid price for the goods was 22,636,200 does not conflict between the parties. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at each rate of 15% per annum under the Civil Act from January 30, 2016, which is the day following the delivery date of a duplicate of the complaint of this case, and from January 30, 2016, which is the day following the delivery date of a duplicate of the complaint of this case, to the Plaintiff, for dispute as to the existence and scope of the Defendant’s obligation, until March 30, 2017, and until the day of full payment.

Furthermore, the Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant’s unpaid goods amounted to KRW 24,636,200, but there is no evidence to acknowledge the unpaid goods amount exceeding the amount recognized earlier. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is reasonable only within the scope of the above recognition.

The judgment on the defendant's assertion that the defendant's "C" product supplied by the plaintiff is not able to be distributed because it does not contain any Korean-language indication under the Food Sanitation Act, and the 'D' product is in inferior form and entrance frame, and the 'E' product should be disposed of most short of the distribution period so that the defendant suffered damage and thus the defendant could not respond to the plaintiff's claim. Thus, it is insufficient to recognize it only by the descriptions or images of the 'C' product No. 3-1 to 3, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.