logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.02.26 2018가단13009
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Summary of the cause of the plaintiff's claim

A. On March 15, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to supply salt farm reinforcements to the Defendant’s salt farm, and supplied salt farm reinforcements to the Defendant on March 15, 2012. The Defendant did not pay KRW 15,90,000 for the goods. After completing the construction of the salt farm within one month after the Defendant was supplied with the reinforced materials, the Plaintiff may receive subsidies from the Newan-gun to submit a settlement statement to the Newan-gun. However, the Defendant did not perform the construction of the salt farm, thereby resulting in the Plaintiff’s failure to receive subsidies from the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Plaintiff claims to the Defendant for the payment of KRW 43,035,00 and damages for delay, including the sum of KRW 15,900,000 and KRW 27,135,00.

B. Around January 16, 2013, the Plaintiff supplied roof materials of KRW 8,954,375 to the Defendant. However, the Plaintiff paid KRW 5,00,000 out of the price of the goods and was unable to pay the remainder of the goods. As such, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the remainder of the price of the goods and damages for delay.

2. Determination:

A. (1) As to the claim for the payment of the price for the goods, there is a defense that the Plaintiff paid the price for the goods of KRW 15,900,00 as to the claim for the reinforcement of the salt farm, which was supplied by the Plaintiff around March 15, 2012. The Defendant asserted that the payment of the price for the goods was made to the Plaintiff on April 11, 2012. As such, the Defendant’s defense for payment of the price for the goods is reasonable, since there is no dispute between the parties. Therefore, this part of the claim for the payment of the goods is without merit. (2) As to the part of the claim for the payment of the price for the goods from the delivery of the roof materials on January 16, 2013 by the Plaintiff, and even if the remainder remains, the Defendant satisfied the payment of the price for the goods, and

In the name of "C", the Plaintiff is a personal entrepreneur who produces and sells synthetic resin raw material recycling business, salt farm floor materials, etc.

arrow