logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.07.10 2014나54610
물품대금
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following payment order shall be revoked, and that part shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. The basic fact is that the Plaintiff operates a business related to the printing of the automatic Sticket with the trade name of “C”, and the Defendant operates the printing business with the trade name of “D”, and the fact that the Plaintiff supplied the goods, such as the free land used for printing, to the Defendant from March 2004 to February 2012 does not conflict between the parties.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The plaintiff asserts that he/she is liable to pay the plaintiff damages for delay from March 1, 2012 to the trading ledger (Evidence A 2; hereinafter "the trading ledger of this case") where he/she directly prepared the transaction details by the period, and the plaintiff supplied the defendant with goods of KRW 406,254,397 in total from March 2004 to February 2, 2012 (including value-added tax), but the defendant paid only KRW 300,852,250 to the plaintiff for the same period. Thus, the defendant asserted that he/she is liable to pay the plaintiff damages for delay from March 1, 2012 to the plaintiff, and that the trading ledger of this case was unilaterally prepared by the plaintiff, and that the defendant did not indicate or clarify the amount of the goods transferred to the plaintiff's bank account.

B. First of all, according to each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 2, Eul evidence Nos. 3-1 through 15 as to the credibility of the trading ledger of this case, the trading ledger of this case contains a relatively detailed statement about the date of sales, items, quantity, sales proceeds, and settlement amount of each of the goods supplied by the plaintiff to the defendant. The period of the transaction exceeds eight years, and the plaintiff continuously prepared and arranged the transaction details with the defendant, and the defendant started to pay the price of the goods by account transfer from April 201 to August 2013.

arrow