logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2020.12.17 2019가단12445
물품대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur who runs a wholesale and retail business in the name of “C”. 2) The Defendant is the nominal owner of business registration with the name of “D(E)” and the type of business as the name of “D” and “D”.

B. Around December 20, 2016, the Plaintiff supplied a household to the F Changdong on the side of the F Changdong store. (2) The Plaintiff supplied each of the households on three occasions “D(E)” around January 17, 2017, around April 11, 2017, and around June 3, 2017.

(3) The amount of unpaid goods is KRW 40,582,60 (i.e., F Changdong Points 2,692,500) (i.e., KRW 13,564,650 related to the goods as of January 17, 2017; KRW 16,430,150 related to the goods as of April 11, 2017; KRW 16,195,300 related to the goods as of June 3, 2017 - KRW 2,50,000,000 as of September 29, 2017 - KRW 1,50,50,000 as of November 21, 2017; KRW 1,50,000 as of January 27, 2017; KRW 10,500 as of January 20, 2005; and KRW 15,2017).

2. The party's assertion and judgment

A. 1) The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant is the person under the title of business registration, such as D(E). The Plaintiff supplied the instant goods to the Defendant. The Plaintiff seeks payment of KRW 40,582,600 for the unpaid goods to the Defendant. 2) The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Defendant is G’s father and G is only a transaction with the Plaintiff.

In addition, the Plaintiff transferred the claim for the amount of goods unpaid to H.

B. We examine whether the Plaintiff traded goods of this case with the Defendant (i.e., whether a contract for the supply of goods of this case was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant).

The facts that the business registration of “D (E)” was recorded in the name of the Defendant are as seen earlier, but the following circumstances acknowledged by the purport of the entire pleadings, i.e., the Plaintiff’s terms and conditions of the instant goods supply between G and actual G.

arrow