logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원부천지원 2016.09.08 2015가단29222
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 25,567,70 for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from November 25, 2015 to January 7, 2016.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person running a beverage and wholesale retail business, and the Defendant is a person who takes over and operates a mutually advantageous hotel called D hotel in Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Jung-gu (hereinafter “D hotel”).

B. On April 8, 2015, the Defendant entered into a hotel sales contract with E (hereinafter “E”) with the content that he/she would acquire D hotel business in KRW 8.75 billion (hereinafter “instant transfer contract”).

C. Since May 1, 2015, the Defendant continued to use the trade name “D tourist hotel” that was previously used while acquiring and operating a D hotel.

The Plaintiff continued to supply goods, such as suspension and inn, etc., to the D hotel prior to the Defendant’s acquisition of the business of the D hotel, and was not paid KRW 25,567,700, out of the price of the goods supplied until February 24, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above recognition of the occurrence of goods-price liability, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid amount of KRW 25,567,700, including the outstanding amount prior to the takeover of the business of a D hotel, and delay damages therefrom, as the Defendant continues to use the previous trade name by taking over the business of a D hotel, barring special circumstances.

B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) As the Defendant agreed to settle contingent liabilities and all outstanding amounts of expenses incurred during the instant business transfer agreement as of May 1, 2015, and agreed to be responsible for the transferor E at the time of settlement, the Defendant is not liable for the payment of the price for the goods incurred prior to the business transfer of the hotel. 2) According to the written evidence Nos. 3, 11 and 13, according to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant and E are liable for any contingent liability under the instant business transfer agreement.

arrow