logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.10.24 2014나1593
물품대금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is operating a manufacturing company, such as the title “C”, in the wife population B in Young-si.

B. On November 26, 2009, the Defendant is a company established for the purpose of building construction business, engineering work business, and hold-hosing construction business, etc., and, on August 24, 2010, the Seocho C&W construction company (hereinafter “S&D construction”) is a company established for the purpose of indoor construction business, earth construction business, metal structure construction business, etc.

C. The Defendant and the Western C&C construction are all “Seoul Echeon-ro 21-gil 4, Songpa-gu, Seoul (Yeong-dong),” and the construction of Sc&C is using 201 above ground buildings and 202 above, respectively, and all executives of two companies are the same.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 4 and 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was requested by the Defendant to supply the Changho Lake, and the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with the title equivalent to KRW 19,605,124 (hereinafter “instant title”) in total of KRW 11,785,200 on November 3, 201, and KRW 7,819,924 on January 4, 201, and KRW 19,605,124 on the said title. The Defendant paid KRW 100,000 out of the title payment.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the remaining amount of Changho Lake to the plaintiff KRW 9,605,124 and damages for delay.

B. The defendant's assertion that the defendant did not request the plaintiff to supply the windows or deliver the windows from the plaintiff.

The plaintiff supplied the title of this case not to the defendant but to the Sc&D Construction.

Therefore, the defendant does not have the obligation to pay the above price for the defendant.

C. who is the party to the judgment is a matter of interpretation of the intent of the party involved in the contract.

The interpretation of a declaration of intent is to clearly confirm the objective meaning that the parties have given to the act of indicating it, and in the event that the contents of a contract are written between the parties to the contract, it is not written.

arrow