(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2021.02.10 2020가단8121

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2021.02.10 2020가단8121

물품대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. From August 2017 to April 2019, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with goods, such as 184,672,521 won, in the name of “C”, which is “C”.

Since May 2019, D has terminated the transaction with the defendant while converting the aforesaid crowdfunding into a corporation.

2) The Defendant did not pay KRW 55,465,961 out of the price of the goods supplied by the Plaintiff during the period in which the Plaintiff was operating a futures company.

The defendant is liable to pay the price of the above goods and the amount of late payment thereof.

B. The Plaintiff was in a transaction with the E Co., Ltd. or D practically operated by the Defendant D, and the Defendant is not a party to the transaction.

Even if the Defendant was the nominal transaction party, it was based on the Defendant’s lending the name to D, and the Plaintiff was aware that the actual business owner was the company or D, and thus, the Defendant is not liable to pay the price for the goods.

2. According to the evidence Nos. 21 and 24 (including the number of branches; hereinafter the same shall apply) of the judgment, there is room to acknowledge the fact that the Plaintiff supplied goods to C registered with the business entity by the Defendant.

However, according to the evidence Nos. 21-23, the defendant is merely an employee employed by D, and the defendant appears to have lent only the name of the business owner, the plaintiff's employee also recognized D as the chairperson, and the plaintiff received a letter of landing from E Co., Ltd. In full view of this, the plaintiff was aware that he was merely a person who lent the name of the defendant and was not a real transaction party.

It is reasonable to view it.

Unlike this, there is no evidence to reverse it (the plaintiff did not appear on the date of pleading). The plaintiff's assertion cannot be accepted.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion cannot be accepted, and it is dismissed.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원군산지원 2020.01.17 2019가단55895

-수원지방법원 2020.07.09 2019나82691

-광주지방법원 2015.05.07 2014가단55043

-인천지방법원부천지원 2019.03.08 2018가단7407

-창원지방법원 2018.09.21 2018나1005