logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2014.10.06 2013가단37172
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed to the Plaintiff KRW 67,382,730, and 6% per annum from August 25, 2013 to October 28, 2013.

Reasons

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of each pleading in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 10, 12, and evidence Nos. 11-1 and 2, the plaintiff is a merchant operating construction material sales business in D's trade name; the defendants who are joint businessmen of E's business from November 18, 2011 to August 24, 2013 as 148,662,730 won; the defendants sold the construction material, such as styren, styren, styren, and miscellaneous, etc.; the defendants can be acknowledged to have paid the plaintiff the total sales proceeds of the above construction material from February 20, 2012 to October 10, 2013. The defendants' assertion that the above evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 6 are insufficient to accept the defendants' assertion that the defendants sold the above construction material to the plaintiff (the above 81,280,000 won).

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendants are jointly and severally obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of the construction materials sales proceeds (i.e., KRW 148,662,730 - KRW 81,280,00) and damages for delay at each rate of 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from August 25, 2013 to October 28, 2013, which is apparent in the record that the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case is the last delivery date of the complaint of this case, and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date of full payment.

As to this, the Defendants asserted that, on September 12, 2013, the Defendants transferred to the Plaintiff the claim for the refund of the lease deposit amount of KRW 40,000,000, which the Defendants possessed with G, instead of paying the Plaintiff the above construction material sales payment obligation (hereinafter “instant obligation”) against the Plaintiff, the Defendants’ obligation against the Plaintiff was repaid within the scope of KRW 40,000 and extinguished.

However, it is presumed that the obligor transfers other claims to the obligee in relation to the repayment of obligations would be transferred by means of a security or repayment for the repayment of obligations, unless there are special circumstances.

arrow