logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.04.16 2019나70681
물품대금 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same reasoning as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for cases of cutting or adding as follows, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Each "Evidence A 2 through 9" in the third and 18 of the judgment of the first instance shall be applied with "Evidence A 2 through 11".

The third part of the judgment of the first instance is added following the third part of the judgment.

The plaintiff asserts that "the defendant company supplied goods from the plaintiff on the ground of the non-party company which has no financial ability to evade the obligation to pay the price for the goods, and the defendant company is obligated to pay the price for the goods, the amount of KRW 73,640,698, and the delay damages therefor to the plaintiff." Since it can be seen that there are arguments to hold the plaintiff liable by the legal person, it can be seen that each of the statements in the evidence No. 2 and No. 11 is included in the appearance of the non-party company, but it is merely a case where the non-party company takes the form of the legal person in fact while it takes the form of the legal person, and in substance, it is difficult to conclude that the substance falls under the case where it is merely a case where it is used as a means to avoid the application of the law to the defendant company behind the legal personality or without any other evidence to acknowledge it

In addition, the plaintiff asserts that "the defendant company explicitly allowed the non-party company to run its business using the trade name of the defendant company, and the plaintiff supplied the defendant company with goods by mistake as the owner of the business." Thus, the defendant company is jointly and severally liable to pay the price for the goods to the plaintiff pursuant to Article 24 of the Commercial Act, and the compensation for delay to the plaintiff." Thus, Article 24 of the Commercial Act provides that "the defendant company is jointly and severally liable to pay the price for the goods and the compensation for delay to the plaintiff."

arrow