매매대금
Among the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid under the order shall be revoked.
1. The reasoning for this part of the judgment on the claim for the purchase price is as stated in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, with the exception of adding “the fact that the Defendant entered into the contract” under Section 15 of the judgment of the court of first instance, subsequent to the addition of “the fact that the Defendant acquired the assets and business rights, etc. of E from the Plaintiffs on October 16, 2016, and operated the said company.” As such, this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical
2. Determination on the claim for the settlement of accounts receivable
A. As of October 15, 2016, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant settled accounts on credit and credit purchase obligations of E Company as of October 15, 2016, and the Defendant paid the difference to the Plaintiffs in cases where the sales credit exceeds the purchase obligation. 2) According to the settlement statement prepared as of October 15, 2016 (hereinafter “instant settlement statement”), the settlement statement prepared as of October 15, 2016 (i.e., USD 151,982.35 for credit sales claims of E Company and USD 81,934.89 for credit sales, and the difference between the sales credit and the purchase obligation is USD 70,047.46 for credit sales.
3) The Plaintiffs and the Defendant agreed to deduct USD 7,799.07 from the settlement of expenses from October 1, 2016 to the 15th of the same month, and USD 10,000 from the difference between the sales claim and the sales obligation. The Defendant deposited USD 5,00 with the Plaintiffs on November 30, 2017. [In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, and evidence No. 13, each of the statements No. 13, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
B. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiffs the settlement amount of USD 47,248.39 [$ 70,047.46 - USD 22,799.07 (= USD 7,799.07 US$ 10,000)] and delay damages.
C. The defendant's assertion 1) The defendant's argument settlement statement of this case is merely merely that the plaintiffs unilaterally prepared and presented, and it is not agreed with the defendant, and the defendant acquired the E company.