(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.12.10 2020나1377 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.12.10 2020나1377

물품대금등

Text

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion and Nonparty C jointly operate a business body called “D” as a husband and wife. The Plaintiff supplied goods to the said “D” from 2015 to February 10, 2017, and did not receive the total amount of KRW 3,946,400.

Therefore, the defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay the above KRW 3,946,400 and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that: (a) around August 2018, the Defendant lent the name of the business operator to C; and (b) C operated the business in the name of the Defendant from September 2018 to February 10, 2017; (c) however, the Defendant did not know of the price of the goods that occurred from the date of the Plaintiff’s assertion until February 10, 2017.

2. The following circumstances revealed by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the statements and arguments set forth in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including virtual numbers) and the overall purport of the arguments, namely, the following circumstances: (a) C has registered a business with the trade name of "D" using semiconductor equipment and machinery manufacturing as its main business on March 3, 2016; (b) according to the transaction account book submitted by the plaintiff, the plaintiff transacted with the above "D" from April 2016; (c) the defendant made a separate business registration with the name of "E" with the semiconductor equipment and machinery manufacturing as its main business on August 30, 2018; (d) the plaintiff received each letter of May 21, 2015 to pay the outstanding amount accrued from May 21, 2019 (Evidence No. 2); (c) although each of the above documents was stated in C and the name of the defendant, the defendant did not have any other obligation to sign the documents and to pay the outstanding amount to the defendant from May 21, 2019 to 207.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.

3. Conclusion.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.29 2016가단5234121

-서울동부지방법원 2017.01.10 2015가합1572

-수원지방법원안산지원 2020.09.09 2019가단13124

-인천지방법원 2020.08.13 2020고단4110

-수원지방법원 2021.04.01 2020가단516168