logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.02.01 2018나4077
물품대금
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person who runs the traditional distribution business under the trade name of “C,” and the Defendant is a person who operates the Fmatet, which is the retail store in Daejeon Sung-gu D and E (hereinafter “instant Mtet”).

B. The statement of transactions prepared by the Plaintiff is written on the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s supply column was written on February 7, 2017; (b) February 11, 2017; (c) February 12, 2017; (d) February 23, 2017; (c) March 8, 2017; (d) March 22, 2017; and (e) March 24, 2017; (c) the total supply price up to the time is KRW 3,354,00; and (d) the statement of transactions made on March 24, 2017, written on the transaction list written on March 24, 201: the total supply price up to the time is KRW 271,00,000; and (e) the balance is KRW 3625,00,000, respectively.

(However, the statement submitted by the Defendant on March 24, 2017 contains no indication in the column of "amount" in the transaction statement submitted by the Defendant). 【No dispute exists, the entry in the evidence No. 12-1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was indicated from February 7, 2017 to March 24, 2017 as the date of March 29, 2017, but the date confirmed as the trading statement submitted by the Plaintiff is until March 24, 2017.

Until now, the Defendant supplied eggs to the instant marina, but did not receive the amount of the disturbance equivalent to the total amount of KRW 3,625,000.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above amount of KRW 3,625,00 and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion: (a) transferred the instant marina to G on January 25, 2017, which was operated by the Defendant; (b) but (c) was transferred the instant marina from G on March 15, 2017 as G did not pay the transfer price.

Therefore, during the period from January 25, 2017 to March 15, 2017, the column supplied by the Plaintiff to the instant marina was ordered by G, not the Defendant, and the Defendant already paid to the Plaintiff the price for the order column on March 22, 2017 and March 24, 2017.

3. Determination

A. From February 7, 2017 to March 8, 2017, the Plaintiff from February 7, 2017 to March 8, 2017.

arrow