beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. According to the Plaintiff’s written evidence Nos. 5, 6, 9, and 10 as well as the overall purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff’s claim for KRW 19,513,050, which is a part of the product price claim for which he/she supplied the Defendant with food materials, such as Korea, from October 2015 to March 2016, is asserted that the Defendant transferred the claim to the Plaintiff and notified the Defendant thereof on May 2016. However, according to the purport of evidence No. 10 and the entire pleadings, the notification is sufficiently recognized as the transferor.
This recognition.
Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay the above acquisition money to the Plaintiff.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant calculated an excessive amount of supply differently from the fact due to mistake in the transaction of supplying goods to the Defendant. If the portion appropriated in this excess is excluded, the Defendant’s obligation to pay for the goods to the well-dying with respect to the goods at the time of the assignment of the assignment of the assignment of the assignment of the assignment of the assignment of the assignment of the assignment of the assignment of the assignment of the assignment of the goods remains no longer. 2) As such, the agreement between the Defendant and the Plaintiff on the assignment of the assignment of the assignment of the claims is null and void, and even if not, the Defendant’s revocation of the assignment of the assignment of the assignment of claims on the ground of the above error and the Defendant’s assertion as “cancellation” of the contract on the assignment of the assignment of claims
Since it was notified to the defendant, the transfer contract has no effect.
3 Even if the Plaintiff’s claim for the amount of the transferred money is recognized, the Plaintiff is paid KRW 676,675 through the distribution procedure of deposit, and thus, the amount should be deducted from the Plaintiff’s transfer money.
B. Determination as to the non-existence of a claim for the purchase-price of goods is made as a whole with the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and all pleadings.