beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.10.14 2020가단211275

물품대금

Text

The defendants are jointly and severally liable to the plaintiff 181,51,380 won and 6% per annum from February 1, 2020 to October 14, 2020.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a legal entity that runs the wholesale and retail business of coal and miscellaneous materials, and the Defendants are those who run wholesale and retail business, such as carbon and calcium, in the name of Defendant B’s “D”.

The issue amount as of the date of issuance Nos. 11, 24, 909, 500 on December 1, 2018; 25,58, 600 on January 4, 2019; 25, 530, 300 on January 4, 2019; 41, 267, 605 on January 31, 31, 2019; 45,864,000 on June 31, 2019; 32,247, 8307,75, 77, 208 on February 28, 2019; 308; 4. The issue amount issued on June 16, 2019: < Amended by Act No. 13874, Mar. 29, 2019; Act No. 13874, Jan. 4, 2019; Act No. 150065, Mar. 16, 20194>

B. On December 2018, from around January 2012 to around January 2020, the Plaintiff issued each of the tax invoices as listed below (hereinafter “each of the instant tax invoices”), and the Defendants consented to and approved the issuance of each of the said tax invoices by sequence.

C. From January 31, 2019 to January 31, 2020, the Defendants repaid KRW 120,000,000 to the Plaintiff out of the issue amount of each of the instant tax invoices.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 9, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. In full view of each of the above evidence, Gap evidence, and evidence Nos. 10 and 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiff supplied Eul through E with the goods, such as low carbon equivalent to the issue amount of each of the tax invoices of this case (the defendant also recognized that he was supplied with the goods equivalent to the issue amount of each of the tax invoices of this case, but it is argued that some of them were supplied through transaction with E and the plaintiff was paid to E without knowing whether the plaintiff was the original supplier.). The plaintiff sent a detailed transaction statement with the items, unit, quantity, unit, unit price, and unit price of the goods delivered to the defendants each of the time of issuance of each of the tax invoices of this case to E by e-mail. Thus, each of the above facts recognized and this case.