(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2019.02.22 2018가단3596

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2019.02.22 2018가단3596

물품대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The basic facts are acknowledged based on the following facts: (a) the Plaintiff supplied Nonparty D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”); (b) the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Nonparty Company seeking payment of KRW 31,695,000,000 payable to Nonparty Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”); and (c) the judgment accepting the claim was rendered on October 19, 2017 and became final and conclusive around that time (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2017Ga6504, hereinafter “Seoul Central District Court Decision”); and (c) the fact that the Defendant is the representative of the Nonparty Company is either a dispute between the parties or a dispute between them; and (d) the purport of the entire pleadings in the written evidence Nos. 1 through 3; and

2. The plaintiff asserts that since the defendant agreed to pay the non-party company's unpaid goods to the plaintiff as an individual, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the remaining KRW 33,405,430 among the principal and interest already paid pursuant to the separate judgment, and the delay damages therefor.

According to the overall purport of the evidence Nos. 6 and 12 as well as the whole pleadings, it is acknowledged that the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to pay the unpaid goods to the non-party company, and that the Defendant obtained a loan as security or made a repayment of his/her real estate in the manner of selling it. However, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant entered into an agreement with the Plaintiff to pay the obligations of the non-party company in the status of an individual who is not the representative of the non-party company, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the existence of

Therefore, the above argument cannot be accepted.

In addition, the plaintiff asserts that the non-party company is merely an individual company of the defendant and thus the defendant should pay the unpaid goods, but it can be seen that the non-party company has become a corporate body to the extent that it is not actually engaged in personal business.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2017.12.07 2016가단226667

-서울서부지방법원 2018.09.13 2016가단200036

-대전지방법원 2015.09.17 2015가단9490

-대법원 1988. 9. 13. 선고 85누130 판결

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.02.12 2018가단5067998