(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.05.18 2016나63789

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) 서울남부지방법원 2017.05.18 2016나63789

양수금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 5, it is recognized that the defendant written a letter of payment that the defendant would purchase the goods of clothing from C and pay 4,500,000 won for the unpaid goods on March 25, 2004 on a 25th day of each month, and that the representative D of C would transfer the above goods price claim to the plaintiff on January 6, 2005 and notify the defendant of the transfer of the claim on December 9, 2013.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay 4,500,000 won and damages for delay to the plaintiff who takes over the claim for the price of goods.

2. The defendant's defense is defense that the defendant's claim for the purchase price of the goods of this case expired by prescription.

In this regard, the extinctive prescription of the claim for the price of goods in this case is three years as stipulated in Article 163 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Act, since the claim for the price of goods in this case is only to confirm the obligation for the price of goods and it does not result in

However, at the latest the due date for the claim for the price of the goods of this case arrives on May 25, 2005 (from March 25, 2004 to 300,000 won each month in accordance with the written rejection), and the fact that the plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case on May 4, 2014, which was three years after the lawsuit of this case was filed, is apparent in the record, and thus, the plaintiff's claim for the price of the goods of this case terminated by prescription.

Therefore, the defendant's defense is justified.

3. The plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with the conclusion different from this, and it is revoked by the defendant's appeal, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

참조조문

-민법 제163조 제6호

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2017.08.18 2017나40440

-창원지방법원 거창지원 2017.01.17 2016가단11023

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.11.18 2015가단14528

-서울남부지방법원 2020.08.13 2019나62749

-인천지방법원 2019.06.25 2018가단8544