beta
(영문) 전주지방법원 2016.10.25 2014가단29317

물품대금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 83,410,768 to the Plaintiff and its related KRW 6% per annum from July 1, 2015 to October 25, 2016.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From the beginning of November 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant, who supplied food materials to the school, etc., to supply the food materials for group meal service. From that time to June 2015, the Plaintiff traded with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant transaction”).

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant: (a) during the aforementioned transaction period: (b) from November 4, 201 to November 3, 2014, without preparing a written agreement on the discount rate; (c) based on oral agreement alone, the Plaintiff and the Defendant: (a) provided by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, without preparing a trade agreement on the discount rate; (d) provided by the oral agreement alone, at a discount of 10% from the original cost of food materials that the Plaintiff provided to the Defendant; (b) made a transaction at a rate of 5% or 13% from November 4, 2014 to June 2015; and (e) made a trade at a rate of 15% from the original cost of food materials supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant; and (e) made a transaction at a rate of 5% from the latter by the tenth day of the month following the due date agreed upon by the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Eul evidence No. 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendant filed three lawsuits claiming payment of unpaid goods including the instant lawsuit against the defendant in relation to the instant transaction with the defendant, and agreed to withdraw all the said three lawsuits upon receiving KRW 55 million from the defendant. According to the above agreement, the defendant transferred the said three lawsuits to the defendant on October 17, 2014, KRW 17 million, KRW 35 million on November 14, 2015, KRW 5.5 million on January 14, 2015, and KRW 5.5 million on January 3, 2015, but the plaintiff did not withdraw the instant lawsuit. Accordingly, according to the evidence Nos. 8 and 9, the plaintiff asserted that the instant lawsuit should be dismissed because there is no benefit in protecting the rights. Accordingly, according to each of the evidence No. 10, KRW 17,000 on October 17, 2014, the defendant raised the instant lawsuit after the filing of the lawsuit.