logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원부천지원 2019.09.27 2018가단113326
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendant’s annual interest in KRW 50,957,016 and KRW 49,725,016 among the Plaintiff, from July 19, 2018 to September 27, 2019.

Reasons

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. On February 12, 2018, the Plaintiff asserted that since QHD 2,00 assembly unit price of QHD 2,300, which was placed by the Defendant, was 2,300 won, and 813 units were supplied and the remaining 187 units were kept, the Plaintiff should be paid the cost of processing 2,30,000 won and the value-added tax thereon.

The fact that the Plaintiff was awarded a contract to assemble QHD 1,00 goods supplied by the Defendant and delivered 80 goods to the Defendant is without dispute between the parties and the Defendant. If the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 9 reveals the overall purport of the pleadings, it is recognized that the Defendant agreed to pay the amount of assembly on the following day after the Plaintiff was handed over the aforementioned set from the Plaintiff. Thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 1,840,00 (=800 x 2,300 x 2,00) and the value-added tax of KRW 184,00 and 184,000 (value-added tax of KRW 2,024,00) as well.

The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to prove that the Plaintiff delivered a black box exceeding 800 persons to the Defendant, so even if the Plaintiff assembled a black box exceeding 800 persons, the part of the claim for the amount of assembly proceeds did not arrive at the due date.

Therefore, this part of the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

B. The Plaintiff asserts that 32 SDR cards should be paid by the Defendant for KRW 15,645,00 and value-added tax thereon, since 16 SDR cards were sold to the Defendant in unit price of KRW 11,500, and KRW 211 per unit price of KRW 7,000.

The fact that the Plaintiff sold 32 SDR 80 won per unit price to the Defendant is without dispute between the parties, and when considering the purport of the entire argument in Gap evidence 37, it can be acknowledged that the Plaintiff sold 16 period to the Defendant at KRW 7,000 per unit price. Thus, the Defendant sold 9,550,000 won to the Plaintiff (=800 x 11,500).

arrow