(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.04 2017가단5239666

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.04 2017가단5239666

운송료

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 39,290,730 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from November 21, 2017 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, at the Defendant’s request, transported goods of the Defendant Company B (hereinafter “debtor Company”), which is the only officer (in-house director), and the Plaintiff has been engaged in credit sales in consideration of the transaction relationship with the Defendant and the debtor company.

As of July 18, 2016, the amount of unpaid transportation fee of the debtor company was accumulated, the total amount of credit transportation fee of the plaintiff of the debtor company was 40,290,730 won.

B. On July 18, 2016, the following commitments (hereinafter “instant commitments”) were drafted.

In order to pay the debt amount of the KOB, the LOB creditor: The LOB creditor shall promise to pay the debt amount in installments on the last day of each month from January 2017 to the end of January 1, 2017, and shall assume any legal responsibilities at the time of the occurrence of any subsequent problem.

I, if you are unable to pay a legal entity, will undertake personal repayment.

(Resided) The name of debtor on July 18, 2016: The name of the representative of the Gyeonggi-si D (the debtor's official seal is affixed): A

C. The remainder of the transport fee remains 39,290,730 won.

2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant agreed to pay the above amount to the plaintiff at his personal qualification if the debtor company fails to pay the unpaid transportation charges of 40,290,730 won through the letter of undertaking of this case, and that the defendant did not have an obligation to pay the balance of transportation charges and damages for delay to the defendant, since the defendant did not prepare the letter of undertaking of this case at his personal qualification, the defendant did not have an obligation to pay the above amount.

3. In light of the fact that the Defendant is the sole officer of the debtor company’s internal director, and the phrase “I, if I have no capacity to pay for the corporation, I have to undertake personal reimbursement,” etc. of the instant undertaking, the Defendant is the Defendant, even though he did not undertake the instant undertaking.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2015.12.22 2014나15873

-의정부지방법원 2015.03.31 2014노1660

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.02.08 2015가단185029

-대구지방법원 2017.09.08 2016가합208048

-서울동부지방법원 2019.12.18 2016나4848