beta
Text
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
The defendant (Counterclaim defendant) against the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance except for dismissal or modification as follows, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of
Both “A” and “Plaintiff Company” are collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs”, “WitnessO” as “O of the first instance trial witness”, “Witness P” as “P of the first instance trial”, and “Appraiser” as “an appraiser of the second instance trial” (Provided, That this excludes “A of the third instance judgment” under the second instance judgment). “In the subordinate businesses of the Plaintiff Company” under the 5th 10th 5th 10 to 11th 1st eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth e. “
The 5th judgment of the first instance court shall be amended from 20 to 6th sentence as follows:
On July 1, 2016, when the instant lawsuit was pending, the Plaintiff received a decision to commence rehabilitation procedures on August 24, 2016 after filing an application for commencement of rehabilitation procedures with the Suwon District Court 2016 Ma1025, and on January 29, 2018, the rehabilitation procedures were concluded on January 29, 2018, as follows.
“B) Of the goods supplied by the Plaintiff, the amount unpaid by the Defendant is KRW 207,060,201. The fact that the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff, but the Defendant did not receive the goods amounted to KRW 30,301,056 does not conflict between the parties.
The plaintiff asserts that 10,671,500 won for the goods not taken over by the defendant exists, but it is not sufficient to acknowledge it only with the entries of Gap 5 through 8, and since there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, this part of the claim is without merit.
[Defendant appeared at the preparatory date for pleading on July 7, 2015 and stated that there is no dispute over the fact that the price of the goods, which the Defendant ordered to the Plaintiff and did not accept, was 40,702,556 won, including the price of the goods that was ordered to the Plaintiff. However, on September 10, 2015, the Defendant ordered the goods through a counterclaim but did not receive from the Plaintiff (I’s value).