logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원강릉지원 2015.07.08 2014가단6110
약정금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On February 22, 2008, the Plaintiff and C concluded a verbal contract with the Defendant to transfer the D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”)’s license amounting to KRW 300 million, and completed all acts arising from the said transfer.

B. Since then, on September 30, 2009, the Defendant did not pay the above transfer price of KRW 300 million to the Plaintiff, the Defendant prepared and sent to the Plaintiff a letter of payment (Evidence A 1) stating that “The Defendant shall take over the loans of KRW 170 million from the financial institution of the instant company and pay KRW 130 million to the Plaintiff, on December 5, 2009, KRW 30 million, and KRW 50 million on June 30, 2010, KRW 50 million, and KRW 50 million on December 31, 2010, respectively.”

C. However, on November 3, 2009, the Defendant paid only KRW 30 million and did not pay the remainder of KRW 100 million.

Since then, on May 10, 2010, the Defendant again prepared and sent to the Plaintiff a letter of commitment (Evidence 2-1 of the evidence No. 2 of this case (hereinafter “instant letter”) indicating a total of KRW 127 million as the repayment amount, unlike the instant letter of commitment, the Defendant did not raise any objection thereto.

E. Accordingly, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 97 million (= KRW 127 million – KRW 30 million) calculated by deducting the money repaid as above from the money that the Defendant provided to the Plaintiff pursuant to the instant agreement, and the delay damages therefrom.

2. The judgment of the court below is based on evidence that the defendant paid a total of KRW 300 million to the plaintiff with the license fee of the company of this case and agreed to pay KRW 127 million among them in cash, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 4-1, Eul evidence 3, and Eul witness testimony.

However, evidence No. 1 and evidence No. 2-1 (i.e., evidence No. 4-1) cannot be used as evidence since there is no evidence to prove the authenticity of each evidence, and the defendant No. 1.

arrow