1. The Defendant’s KRW 196,00,000 as well as the annual amount of KRW 5% from December 20, 2013 to November 7, 2014, and the following.
1. On July 29, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) sold the machinery listed in the separate sheet to the Defendant as KRW 341,00,000 (including value-added tax); and (b) agreed on October 31, 2013 on the date of payment and the date of delivery of the article; and (c) on December 19, 2013, the Plaintiff can be acknowledged to have delivered the whole machinery, including the 2-liter equipment, to the Defendant on December 19, 2013; and (d) the Plaintiff, on the other hand, has received 145,00,000,000 of the above purchase price from the Defendant; (b) barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remaining purchase price (i.e., KRW 31,00,000,0000; - 1.41,000,0000 per annum from the date of delivery to the date of 201,2015,2000.
(A) The Plaintiff filed a claim for damages for delay from November 1, 2013, the day following the date of delivery of the goods and the payment for delay from the date of delivery of the goods. However, unless there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff delivered the said goods to the Defendant by October 31, 2013, this part of the Defendant’s assertion on the ground that the Defendant delayed the performance of the payment obligation is without merit).
A. The Defendant paid the remaining amount with a loan from the Small and Medium Business Corporation. As a result of the evaluation of the attached list machinery, there were circumstances where the actual value significantly falls short of the sale price, and accordingly, the Defendant asserted that the payment of the remaining amount could not be made because the loan was not executed. Therefore, there is no evidence to acknowledge that there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant to pay the remaining amount under the above method.