logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 서산지원 2018.03.21 2017가단614
물품대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 29, 2014, the Defendant entered into a subcontract with C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) by setting the contract amount as KRW 4.43 billion with respect to the packing work among D general industrial complex creation work (hereinafter “instant construction work”).

B. The Plaintiff and C prepared a written statement of direct payment of the price for asphalt as shown in attached Form 1, and the Defendant prepared and delivered a written statement of direct payment of the price for asphalt as shown in attached Form 2 to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 2, 3, Eul Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) supplied the container to C, and did not receive KRW 123,751,300 for the container.

However, since a statement of direct payment and a written confirmation of payment of the price for asphalt as shown in the attached Table 1 were prepared, the plaintiff and the defendant agreed to pay the price for asphalt directly to the plaintiff, or the defendant exempted the defendant from the obligation to pay the price for asphalt, or entered into a contract with a third party for the purpose of acquiring the plaintiff's right to receive the price for asphalt with the plaintiff as the beneficiary, or the defendant transferred C's right to claim the price for the construction against the defendant to the defendant, and the defendant accepted it.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 123,751,300 won for the price of goods supplied by the container and damages for delay.

(2) The Defendant’s assertion C concluded a contract for the supply of packing equipment and materials with E for the instant construction.

The Plaintiff entered into a supply contract with E and the Plaintiff supplied the database to E.

Therefore, since the plaintiff did not deliver a license to C, the defendant does not have a duty to respond to the plaintiff's request.

(b) the judgment health team, a statement of direct payment of the price for asphalts, such as attached Form 1, and attached Form 2.

arrow