logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.10.13 2015가단31814
물품대금
Text

1. Defendant B’s 45,468,730 won and the interest rate of 15% per annum from November 27, 2015 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Claim against the defendant B

A. The Plaintiff’s determination as to the cause of the claim is as follows: (a) around June 2014, Defendant B, the actual operator of C, KRW 30,68,583, and the same year.

7. 31.14,783,777 won, and the same year;

8. 31.43,322,953 won, the same year;

9. It is recognized that the test material was supplied, including a total of KRW 93,146,90 on 30.2,127,70, and KRW 3,848,889 on 10.31.31 of the same year and KRW 93,146,902, including windows, and windows.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff is a person who received reimbursement of KRW 47,678,172 out of the above amount of KRW 94,751,902.

According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant B is obligated to pay the unpaid amount of KRW 45,468,730 and damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from November 27, 2015 to the date of full payment, as sought by the Plaintiff.

B. Defendant B’s reflectrs (1) asserted to the effect that Defendant B ordered the Plaintiff to work at the construction site after having ordered the Plaintiff to do so, and that the windows were sent to the owner until the dispute with the owner is completed, and that the text was not attached or the construction site was not put into the construction site.

However, according to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 6 and 7 evidence Nos. 7 and each of the above statements and arguments, Defendant B ordered the Plaintiff to suspend the entry of the windows and windows at the same time due to a dispute with the owner of the building, and requested the Plaintiff to leave the windows on March 12, 2015. Defendant B, on March 10, 2015, prepared and issued a written confirmation of payment of the balance of KRW 47,073,730 of the windows and windows credit price of the windows and windows on March 10, 2015. In light of the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to deem that Defendant B received all the windows and windows from the Plaintiff, but failed to pay KRW 47,073,730 among them.

Accordingly, Defendant B’s above assertion is without merit.

(2) In addition, under the agreement with the Plaintiff, Defendant B paid the credit payment obligation if the civil dispute between the owner and the building owner is settled and the credit payment obligation is settled.

arrow