logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2020.06.23 2019가단116327
청구이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From October 13, 2014 to May 12, 2017, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking payment of KRW 12,009,50, out of the cost of goods, such as food materials, supplied to the Plaintiff operating the instant restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) under the trade name of “C” (hereinafter “the cost of goods”).

B. On December 26, 2018, the foregoing court rendered a decision on performance recommendation to the Defendant that “the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 12,009,500 to the Defendant and damages for delay thereof,” and the said decision on performance recommendation was finalized on February 12, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment are only registered as business operator of the restaurant of this case under the name of the plaintiff, and the person who actually operated the restaurant of this case and received food materials from the defendant was responsible for all debts incurred in relation to the above restaurant as D. Thus, the plaintiff did not have any obligation to pay the price of the goods of this case to the defendant.

In full view of the following facts: (a) the statement of No. 3 alone is insufficient to admit the Plaintiff’s assertion; (b) there is no other evidence to acknowledge it; and (c) the overall purport of each statement and argument of No. 2 through No. 5 (including paper numbers) in the Plaintiff’s name from November 2014 to April 2017, the payment of the goods was made in the Defendant’s account; and (d) the tax invoice for the goods of this case was issued in the name of the Plaintiff on the premise that the recipient is the Plaintiff; and (c) the Plaintiff discussed the reduction and installment payment with the Defendant on the premise that he was liable for the payment of the goods of this case prior to the filing of the instant lawsuit. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff is liable to pay the goods of this case against the Defendant as a person who was supplied with food

arrow