logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.06.27 2017가단200101
물품대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was not liable for the amount of goods due to transactions with B (closed on November 14, 2014) from March 2012 to May 2014 due to transaction relations with B, and that the Defendant Company acquired the outstanding amount due, and that the Defendant Company was in fact the same company with the workplace, actual operator, transaction partner, etc., and the Defendant Company is liable for paying the outstanding amount.

B. Determination 1) According to the evidence Nos. 2 and 5 of A, it is recognized that C, which is presumed as the transferor operator of B, has written a written confirmation to the effect that “B transferred the obligation to the Plaintiff to the Defendant Company.” However, the said document is merely a written confirmation document prepared by C, and is not an expression of intent by the Defendant Company, such as accepting the acquisition of the obligation to pay the outstanding amount. There is no evidence to deem that the Defendant Company received the obligation to pay the outstanding amount incurred in the transaction between B and the Plaintiff, or comprehensively succeeded to the business of B. In addition, there is insufficient evidence to support that B, etc. was incorporated by abusing the corporate system to evade the obligation to pay the outstanding amount to the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to support this otherwise.

The plaintiff's assertion on a different premise cannot be accepted.

2. The plaintiff's claim for the conclusion is dismissed as it is without merit.

arrow