logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.02.11 2019가단806
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 53,322,50 and the interest rate of KRW 12% per annum from December 22, 2018 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) borrowed a construction license from the Defendant to newly construct apartment housing E located in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun (hereinafter “instant apartment”)

B. The F, which was in charge of the instant apartment construction site as the agent of D, requested the Plaintiff to supply materials at the site of the instant apartment construction site, stating to the effect that “the Defendant shall manage the instant construction site under the Defendant’s jurisdiction. The Defendant shall approve the price and issue the tax invoice in the name of the Defendant.

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff from May 1, 2016 to the same year.

6. Until 30.30. Up to the construction site of the apartment of this case, construction materials such as 53,322,500 won were supplied.

The plaintiff's entire list is indicated as a business partner by the defendant, and the tax invoice was issued in the name of the defendant, and the contractor (on-site administrator) is indicated as the defendant in the building management ledger of the apartment of this case.

The plaintiff is not paid the price of the above goods.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, evidence A1 to 4, testimony of witness F, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that since the defendant supplied materials without knowing that he lent his name to D, the defendant is obligated to pay the price for the goods unpaid to the plaintiff. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff was aware of the fact that the name was nominal.

B. (1) The liability of the nominal lender under Article 24 of the Commercial Act is to protect a third party who trades the nominal name by misunderstanding the nominal owner as a business owner. Therefore, if the other party to the transaction knew of or was grossly negligent in making the fact of the nominal name, he/she shall not be held liable. Therefore, whether the other party to the transaction knew of or was negligent in making the fact of the nominal name, as seen above, is exempted from liability.

arrow