beta
Text
1. Defendant B and C shall jointly and severally serve as the Plaintiff KRW 55,712,98 and a duplicate of the instant complaint from October 9, 2014.
Reasons
According to the purport of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 7 as to claims against defendant B and C and the purport of the whole arguments and arguments, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff, who imports and sells frozen fishery products under the trade name of "E," supplied 70.88 tons of frozen fishery products for four occasions from September 29, 2014 to October 8, 2014. The plaintiff, who runs a retail business of freezing fishery products, supplied 70.8 tons of frozen fishery products for 70.88 tons on four occasions; the price of fishery products that the plaintiff did not receive from the defendant C is 5,712,98; the defendant Eul is the father of the defendant C and the F, and the defendant C is the person registered as the business operator of the defendant C, and thus, the defendant Eul is jointly and severally liable to pay the plaintiff 5,712,98 won of the price of fishery products accrued to the plaintiff and the delay damages from October 29, 2014 to 14.
As to the claim against Defendant D, when the Plaintiff’s imported fishery products were stored in the freezing warehouse, G, an employee of Defendant D, immediately acquired them. As such, Defendant D is the person who actually supplied the fishery products supplied by the Plaintiff, and thus, Defendant D is jointly and severally liable with Defendant B and C to pay the amount of fishery products.
As to this, Defendant D asserts that the Plaintiff is not obligated to pay the price for fishery products, since the Defendant was supplied with fishery products by Defendant C, and the transaction price was settled in full with Defendant C.
It is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff supplied the fishery products as Defendant D only with the foregoing evidence, the pre-paid evidence, and the evidence No. 8, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Thus, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is rejected.
The plaintiff's conclusion against the defendant B and C.