beta
Text
1. 156,122,757 won and damages for delay in filing an application for intervention against the defendant by an independent party intervenor.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. 1) The intervenor is a company that supplies food materials to various schools in the Gyeongnam-do area. The intervenor supplied food materials to each school in the name of D, E, F, G, etc., and received the remaining money from the above company after deducting 3% of the price of the goods from the fee. 2) The defendant received the price of the food materials supplied by the intervenor from the school in the course of operating the food materials supply company in the trade name "D" and paid the remaining money after deducting 3% of the price of the goods supplied by the intervenor from the school.
B. The Intervenor’s transfer of the obligation to the Plaintiff, etc. (1) The Defendant: (a) from the 13 schools located in the Gyeongnam-do, such as H Middle Schools, the total sum of 314,392,505 won for food materials for May 2016; and (b) June 1, 2016 from the 111 schools located in the Gyeongnam-do, such as I Middle Schools (from June 1 to 8; hereinafter the same shall apply).
(2) On June 8, 2016, the Intervenor and the Plaintiff concluded a contract on the assignment of claims to transfer KRW 91,19,400 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant claim for the purchase of food materials”) that the Intervenor would have received from the Defendant on June 8, 2016, with the total amount of KRW 67,767,262, respectively.
After that, on June 13, 2016, the intervenor sent to the defendant a notice of assignment of claims to the effect that the instant claim for the price of goods was transferred by content-certified mail.
3. On June 14, 2016, the Defendant sent to the intervenors a written notice stating that “A participant examined the content of the assignment of claims to the Plaintiff on June 8, 2016, but the Defendant did not intend to accept it.”
C. The obligees of the intervenor, such as provisional seizure against the intervenor's claims against the defendant, were issued a provisional seizure order, claims seizure and collection order against all goods-price claims held by the intervenor against the defendant, J, and K as shown in the following table, and each of the above decisions are rendered.