logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.11.24 2016가합56776
물품대금
Text

1. On the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant),

A. Defendant H’s KRW 47,765,00 and its related amount from October 1, 2016:

B. Defendant I shall be 4,360.

Reasons

1. The parties’ assertion as to the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim is that the Plaintiff supplied oil to the Defendants operating the gas station from around October 2015 to October 2016, and the Defendants unpaid a part of the oil price. Thus, the Defendants asserted that they are liable to pay the remainder of the oil price calculated on the basis of the Customer Director and the tax invoice to the Plaintiff.

The Defendants asserted that the supply of oil from the Plaintiff was a supply of oil at the discounted price from N of the Plaintiff’s general team leader, and that some Defendants paid the amount of oil more than the amount claimed by the Plaintiff, and that there is no unpaid amount of oil or less than the amount claimed by the Plaintiff.

Furthermore, Defendant B, C, D, E, and F asserted that they paid advance payment of the amount of discount from the above N was the oil price, and sought a return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the excess amount as a counterclaim against the Plaintiff, by asserting that they were the oil price.

2. There is no dispute between the parties, but the fact that the Plaintiff entered into a oil supply contract with the Defendants on common issues of the main claim and the counterclaim and supplied oil to the Defendants, and the transaction was suspended from the day immediately following the corresponding date of each Defendant stated in the “final Trading Date” in the separate sheet “actual oil price and the amount of the deposit.” However, the Plaintiff and the Defendants are in dispute between the parties on the amount of the oil price agreed upon and the amount of the oil price paid by the Defendants to the Plaintiff,

A. The amount of the oil price agreed between the Plaintiff and the Defendants is as shown in the business partner director and tax invoice [including the evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 19, and 21 (including each number)] prepared by the Plaintiff in the course of supplying oil to the Defendants. From around October 2015 to October 2016, the price of the oil supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendants is “the sales price and the amount of the Plaintiff’s note.”

arrow