logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.06.17 2016나389
매매대금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is running a sales business of building materials with the trade name “D” in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

The defendant is running the interior work business, etc. with the trade name "F" in Bupyeong-si, Ma 201.

B. The Defendant requested the Plaintiff to supply building materials while performing H’s interior works in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G.

C. The Plaintiff supplied construction materials equivalent to KRW 1,717,100 from October 2, 2014 to November 1, 2014 at the above interior construction site.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 through 9, 2, 3-2, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. As to the Plaintiff’s assertion against the Defendant, the Defendant asserts that the Defendant was not the Defendant but the Defendant, and that the other party who entered into a supply contract with the Plaintiff is not the Defendant but the Plaintiff’s claim.

B. In light of the following circumstances as revealed in light of the overall purport of the evidence duly admitted, i.e., the written estimate of the relevant interior works under the name of F operated by the Defendant, ii) the Defendant: (a) reported the Plaintiff to supply the building materials; (b) confirmed the volume and amount of the building materials at the time of delivery; and (c) requested the Plaintiff to pay directly the Plaintiff the subcontract price of KRW 1,717,000 for the said direct payment; and (d) in light of the fact that the Defendant was the contractor, the Plaintiff was the subcontractor, and the Plaintiff was the J and K provided meals to the Plaintiff upon the Defendant’s request, as well as the Plaintiff received part of the price from the ordering person upon the Defendant’s direct payment request, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply of the building materials.

arrow