logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.09.16 2014가합51933
정산금
Text

1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is entitled to KRW 9,867,613 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

Reasons

1. The assertion;

A. On March 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entrusted the Defendant with the cargo that the Plaintiff entered into a transport contract with the Defendant, the owner of Samsan Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Tridong Industry”), and paid the full amount of transport charges paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, on which the Plaintiff agreed to allocate the transport charges to the Defendant at the rate of 70% and 30%.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant consignment agreement.” Since the Defendant, from April 2014 to October 2014, transported the freight amounting to KRW 156,859,623 in total from the Plaintiff’s supply price to the Defendant, the Plaintiff has 10,980,173 won (=156,859,623 won x 10% x 70% x less than KRW 10%, and less than KRW 9,867,613 won under the instant consignment agreement, and the Defendant has against the Plaintiff KRW 2,137,955 won in interest claim against the bill that the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant, and therefore, offset each of the above claims from the amount equal to the Plaintiff’s debt amount exceeding KRW 1,255,97,971,97,975,97,9757,97,97,957,957,97,97,57,97,57,97,7

B. The Defendant’s assertion and counterclaim claim 1) The Defendant: (a) transported the freight of the Twit Industries from the Plaintiff during a month between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff; (b) agreed to distribute the profit upon the commission of the Twit Industries at the rate of 5:5; (c) agreed to distribute the profit upon the commission of the Twit Industries at the rate of 5:5; and (d) notified the Plaintiff that the consignment would not be entrusted; and (e) did not enter into the instant cargo transport consignment agreement with the Plaintiff; (b) rather, (c) requested the Defendant to transport the freight of the Twit Industries until the Plaintiff sought another company; and (d) the Defendant transported the freight until October 2014, which was not paid out of the transport amount.

arrow