beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff supplied oil to the Defendant from June 30, 2004 to July 2, 2016, but did not receive KRW 23,720,115 out of the price. As such, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the oil price of KRW 23,720,115 and the delay damages therefrom.
B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Defendant paid the full amount of the oil price supplied by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff or completed the settlement between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff.
Even if the date of occurrence of the lawsuit in this case expired three years from the filing date of the lawsuit in this case, so the defendant is not liable to pay it to the plaintiff.
2. Determination
A. (1) Determination on the cause of the claim 1) The Plaintiff operated a gas station with the trade name “D” in the Jeonju-gun, Jeonju-gun, and the Defendant operated the fish farm. The Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with diesel oil equivalent to KRW 64,796,215 from June 30, 2004 to July 2, 2016, and the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 34,000,000 as the oil price in the attached repayment statement from December 29, 2006 to February 2, 2016. The fact that a duty-free oil equivalent to KRW 8,207,100 (=27,357 x 300 won per liter) out of the oil supplied to the Defendant as above is not in dispute between the parties, or is not in dispute between the parties concerned, or is not in charge of evidence Nos. 2 through 5 (including each subparagraph; hereinafter the same shall apply).
(2) The Plaintiff is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the unpaid oil price of KRW 22,589,115 (=64,796,215 - KRW 34 million - KRW 8,207,100) and damages for delay therefrom, barring any special circumstance. In addition, the Plaintiff asserts that the unpaid oil price against the Plaintiff exceeds KRW 22,589,115,000, KRW 23,720,115; however, the Plaintiff’s claim for this part of the Plaintiff is not acceptable.