beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for addition of the family judgment as follows, and therefore, it is identical to the part concerning the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is also accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
【Additional Part】 Even if the Defendant entered into an agency contract with the Plaintiff and received a compensatory supply of the instant apparatus as alleged by the Plaintiff
Even if a claim for the price of the instant goods is subject to the three-year extinctive prescription pursuant to Article 163 subparag. 6 of the Civil Act. Before the instant lawsuit is filed, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on November 27, 2012 against the Busan District Court 2012Kadan9392, but withdrawn the lawsuit on December 10, 2013, and the lawsuit was filed on April 22, 2014, which is within six months thereafter, within the record, even though the fact that the instant lawsuit was filed on April 22, 2014, which is within six months thereafter, was acknowledged, and it is apparent that the instant lawsuit was filed three years after May 29, 2009, when the Plaintiff was able to exercise the claim for the price of the goods by supply of the last device. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s claim for the price of the instant goods against the Defendant was completed, and the Defendant’s defense pointing this out has merit.
As to this, the Plaintiff approved to pay the price for goods to the Plaintiff on October 28, 2009 by June 30, 2010, and therefore, the Plaintiff asserted that the extinctive prescription of the instant claim for goods was suspended, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this.
2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.