(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.03.10 2015가단24617

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) 서울서부지방법원 2016.03.10 2015가단24617

양수금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff had a claim for the purchase of goods amounting to KRW 190,800,500 by supplying the Defendant with the mother and pumps. On December 16, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred the claim amounting to KRW 160,000 among them to the Plaintiff and notified the Defendant of the fact of transfer, and the above notification reached the Defendant on December 19, 2013. The Defendant asserts that he is obliged to pay the purchase price to the Plaintiff.

In regard to this, the defendant asserted that the plaintiff's above assertion is groundless, since there is no claim for the price of goods in KRW 160,000,000 against the defendant of the non-party company.

2. The burden of proving the existence of the claim that is the object of the judgment transfer shall be borne by the claimant.

It is insufficient to acknowledge that the non-party company had a claim for the purchase price of KRW 160,00,000 against the defendant around the date of the assignment of the above claim, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

The plaintiff has the right to make a decision with the consent of the defendant's vice-class B without reservation of objection.

Therefore, since B did not withhold an objection against the above assignment of claims, the defendant asserts that he is obligated to pay the above transfer money to the plaintiff, but it is not sufficient to recognize the above transfer money only with the statement of the evidence No. 4, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

In addition, the Plaintiff asserts that, in light of the fact that the Defendant did not mention the absence of the claim to be transferred from July to August 8, 2014 after receiving the notice of the above assignment of claims, the Plaintiff shall be deemed to have given consent to the said assignment of claims without reservation. However, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant gave consent to the said assignment of claims without reservation, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원성남지원 2016.11.10 2014가합206798

-서울서부지방법원 2016.05.27 2015가단24624

-서울남부지방법원 2017.07.06 2016나55559

-광주지방법원 2019.12.20 2019나58727

-대법원 2004. 3. 12. 선고 2003다53275, 53282 판결