logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.08.23 2018나83451
물품대금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Summary of the parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s claim is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff entered into a goods supply contract with the Defendant and supplied synthetic resin, etc. to C Co., Ltd. as directed by the Defendant or the Defendant from July 2017 to April 2018; and (b) the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 67,464,376, which is equivalent to the price of the goods unpaid,

B. It is true that the defendant purchased goods such as synthetic resin from the plaintiff, or the amount of unpaid goods that the defendant is obligated to pay is merely 16 million won, and the remainder is purchased from the plaintiff, and therefore, C Co. is obligated to pay C Co., Ltd.

2. Determination

A. The legal doctrine is a matter of interpreting the intent of a party involved in the contract. If the interpretation of an expression of intent is at issue between the parties, it shall be reasonably interpreted in accordance with logical and empirical rules by comprehensively taking into account the contents of the expression of intent, the motive and background leading up to the expression of intent, the purpose to be achieved by the said expression of intent,

(Supreme Court Decision 2012Da4471 Decided November 29, 2012, and Supreme Court Decision 2015Da21479 Decided December 15, 2016, etc.) (b).

Judgment

1. In light of the above legal principles, there is no dispute between the parties that the Plaintiff supplied part of the above goods to C Co., Ltd., but in full view of the following circumstances, which can be known by the respective statements in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 10, the Plaintiff supplied goods to the Defendant or C Co., Ltd. under a contract for the supply of goods with the Defendant, and the parties to the goods supply contract are the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

(1) The Plaintiff issued an electronic tax invoice with the trade name used by the Defendant as “E” with respect to the goods supplied to the Defendant or C Co., Ltd., and the trade name as “E” and “C” with the trade name as the other party to the transaction.

arrow