beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.06.16 2014가단32532

물품대금

Text

1. Defendant A’s KRW 4,590,950 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from May 21, 2014 to June 16, 2015.

Reasons

Basic Facts

From the early November 201 to March 2012, the Plaintiff supplied agricultural products, such as mash and gral, to Defendant A’s “C” operated by Defendant A.

On October 25, 2012, Defendant A established the “Defendant Incorporated CompanyB” (hereinafter “Defendant Company”).

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings as to the claim against defendant A by November 28, 201, the issue of determining the claim against the plaintiff is that the outstanding amount arising from the transaction between the plaintiff and the defendant is KRW 13,342,00, and the fact that the outstanding amount paid to the plaintiff by the defendant after November 28, 201 is KRW 29,665,00 is not disputed between the parties.

The Plaintiff asserts that, from the above date to March 23, 2012, the goods supplied to Defendant A are as listed in attached Form 1, and that, on the basis of the above date, the unit price of the goods was increased from 4,900 won to 5,100 won per kilogram, from 4,500 won per kilogram, from 4,700 won, and that a statement of accounts (Evidence A 5) was prepared while settling accounts for attempted amounts.

As to this, Defendant A asserts that the goods supplied by the Plaintiff from the above date to March 14, 2012 are as shown in attached Form 2, and there was no agreement to increase the unit price of the goods.

Therefore, the issue is whether the details of the goods supplied and the unit price increase.

The plaintiff of the probative value of Gap evidence 5 (statement of accounts) asserted that Gap evidence No. 5 (statement of accounts) was prepared by mutual agreement between the plaintiff and defendant A while arranging the attempted amount. However, according to the purport of the whole pleadings, the above statement of accounts is merely prepared by the plaintiff at will, and there is no evidence to deem that defendant A consented to the above settlement.

Therefore, it is not possible to recognize Defendant A’s attempted money solely with the statement of the above statement of accounts.

The details of the goods supplied are as follows: (a) based on the evidence No. 4-1 to 53 (each electronic transaction statement), and evidence No. 10-1 to 16 (each transaction statement), and (b) the Defendant A has entered the supply details into each transaction list between evidence No. 1-2 to 15.