logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.11.22 2017나7338
물품대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. Although the Plaintiff supplied ready-mixeds equivalent to KRW 9,617,500 to the Defendant in relation to the Plaintiff’s business (hereinafter “instant construction”), the Plaintiff did not receive the remainder of KRW 240,000, out of the price of the goods. The Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of KRW 9,377,500 (=9,617,500 - 240,000) to the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendant ordered the instant construction from Defendant B’s place of business, and only awarded a subcontract to the National Highway Construction Corporation and Boan Construction Corporation, and did not directly conclude a contract for supply of ready-mixed with the Plaintiff.

2. In full view of the following circumstances, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is difficult to acknowledge the fact that a ready-mixed supply contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

The plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

(1) The Director of Customer (Evidence A), Electronic Tax Invoice (Evidence A) (Evidence A), List of Total Tax Invoice A (Evidence A) (Evidence A), and Director of the Sales Office (Evidence A0) unilaterally prepared by the Plaintiff, and the Defendant confirmed the contents of each of the above documents without the Defendant’s signature and seal affixed to the Director of Customer (Evidence A) and the Director of the Sales Office (Evidence A-1 through 24), each written confirmation of supply (Evidence A-9-1 through 10) and the Director of the Sales Office (Evidence A0) (Evidence A-10).

(2) The circumstances supporting the approval do not seem to have been observed at all times.

② The Defendant is a person who remitted 240,000 won to the Plaintiff’s account on November 30, 2016, which was supplied by the Plaintiff on November 29, 2016. However, the Defendant entered into a contract for the supply of ready-mixed as to the remainder supplied by the Plaintiff.

arrow