logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.05.30 2018나79117
물품대금
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

Purport of claim and appeal

(b).

Reasons

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance, except where "the defendant is changed to "the plaintiff" as "the plaintiff". Thus, this part of the court's explanation is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. 1) The parties’ assertion that the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant on the instant goods, and thus seeking payment of the price for the instant goods. Accordingly, the Defendant did not send the instant goods order to the Plaintiff or receive commercial invoice or the instant goods from the Plaintiff. On April 21, 2016, the Defendant, who was an employee of the Defendant who retired on April 21, 2016, concluded a sales contract with the Plaintiff by stealing the Defendant’s name, and did not have entered into a sales contract with the Plaintiff. 2)

However, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the facts found in the above facts and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, even if an executive officer of the Plaintiff, who was the representative director of the Defendant at the time when the Plaintiff visited the Defendant’s place of business and consulted with J or D about the above goods purchase transaction, such circumstance alone seems to be excessive when D appears in the process of inducing the Plaintiff’s unilateral offer to assist the J, the representative director, and thus, D was delegated the power of representation for the above goods transaction by the Defendant or its representative director

arrow