(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.12.18 2014가단2668

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.12.18 2014가단2668

물품대금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 33,385,473 and a rate of KRW 20% per annum from January 17, 2014 to the date of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 21, 2012, the Defendant was awarded a contract with the same stock company (hereinafter “same”) for the interior decoration construction among the new A apartment construction works (excluding value-added tax), and the Plaintiff has supplied the art monthly materials, etc. to the same person.

B. The Defendant agreed to receive all of the materials from the same person while carrying out a contracted construction work, and the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice with respect to a part of the materials to the Defendant, who is not the same person, and the Defendant also reported the amount of the Plaintiff’s supply to KRW 31,250,430, when filing the return of the value-added tax for the second period of 2013, and reported KRW 3,125,043 as input tax amount.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Entry B in Evidence Nos. 1 and 4, All the arguments

2. The Plaintiff asserted and determined that the Defendant sought the payment of the price of the material ordered by the Defendant, and the Defendant only concluded a labor contract with the same person, and thus, it is not necessary to directly procure and construct the direct materials that may not only be required to provide labor related to interior wood construction works, and that the Plaintiff’s report on the amount of supply is irrelevant to the conclusion of a material supply contract with the matters handled by the tax accountant in accordance with the Plaintiff’s unilateral tax invoice issuance.

According to the following facts, the defendant requested the plaintiff to supply the materials directly to the plaintiff by raising and constructing the shortage of materials due to the error of construction at the defendant's own expense, and accordingly the plaintiff supplied the materials to the defendant. The plaintiff supplied the materials to the defendant.

Therefore, according to the material supply contract concluded as above, the defendant 3,385,473 won 31,250.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2010.10.01 2009가단51264

-서울북부지방법원 2015.05.12 2014나4680

-수원지방법원여주지원 2016.06.01 2014가합580

-인천지방법원 2018.08.17 2017가합61330

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.18 2017가단5212944