beta
Text
Defendant B’s KRW 62,292,700 as well as its annual 6% from October 9, 2019 to February 13, 2020, and the following.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B
A. From July 14, 2016 to October 8, 2019, the Plaintiff supplied Defendant B with agricultural chemicals, materials, etc. equivalent to KRW 370,140,400 from July 14, 2016 to October 8, 2019. The Defendant paid KRW 307,847,700 out of the price of the above goods, and did not pay the remainder of KRW 62,292,70, not in dispute, or is recognized by taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as a whole.
Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 62,292,70 won and the rate of 12% per annum under the Commercial Act from October 9, 2019 to February 13, 2020, which is the delivery date of the instant payment order against Defendant B, from October 9, 2019, and from the next day to the date of full payment.
B. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff paid KRW 211,225,000,00 as the total amount of goods, 14 times from June 30, 2016 to December 30, 2019, however, the Defendant admitted the Plaintiff’s assertion that, from the preparatory document dated October 16, 2020, the Defendant paid KRW 15,40,000 to the Plaintiff on September 26, 2016, KRW 5,540,000 to the Plaintiff, and KRW 5,500,000 on July 8, 2018, KRW 2620,00 to the Plaintiff on August 31, 2018, that is not related to the payment of the instant goods.
According to the specification of transactions (Evidence A No. 2) submitted by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff is recognized to have calculated the amount of goods paid by the Defendant, excluding the said amount, by reflecting the amount paid as above, in the specification of transactions. Therefore, the Defendant’s above assertion is
2. The Plaintiff asserted that Defendant D and C are parties to the transaction of supply of agricultural chemicals, etc. with the Plaintiff, and that Defendant D and C are obligated to pay the unpaid goods price jointly with Defendant B. However, the entries in the evidence No. 3 alone are insufficient to recognize the Plaintiff’s above assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s Defendant D and C did not have any other evidence to