beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the evidence Nos. 1 through 7 as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with the goods, such as molds and kimchi (hereinafter “instant goods”) from March 4, 2014 to November 20, 2015, and the Defendant did not pay KRW 20,974,554 out of the price of the instant goods to the Plaintiff.
According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the unpaid amount of KRW 20,974,554 and damages for delay.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. As to this, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the said amount is not reflected in the price of the instant goods, even though the Defendant paid KRW 18,586,600 to the Plaintiff seven times from October 7, 2014 to December 10, 2014 for the payment of the instant goods.
The fact that the Defendant paid 18,586,600 won to the Plaintiff as the price for goods on seven occasions from October 7, 2014 to December 10, 2014 does not conflict between the parties. However, according to the overall purport of the statement and pleading as to the evidence evidence No. 7, the Plaintiff supplied goods to the Defendant in the course of operating the individual enterprise with the trade name “D” and took over the individual enterprise with the trade name “C” from October 7, 2014 to December 10, 2014, and then supplied goods to the Defendant with the trade name “C” from October 7, 2014 to December 10, 2014, the above assertion is without merit since it is recognized that the amount was appropriated for the claim for the goods supplied to the Defendant during the above period and already reflected therein.
B. In addition, the defendant asserts that there was a substantial quality defect in the quantity of the goods supplied by the plaintiff among the goods supplied by the plaintiff, and the defendant supplied such defective goods to the customer, but did not return them to the customer or receive the price for the goods, and thus, the above property damages should be deducted from the unpaid price for the goods.
(b).