logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.02.15 2017나54607
운송료
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. The text of the judgment of the court of first instance is set forth.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a company whose purpose is combined freight forwarding business, air freight transport business, and the defendant is a company that engages in textile, clothing, malicious business, etc.

B. From October 2009, the Plaintiff handled the business of transporting the cargo for export and import to the destination upon receiving a request from the Defendant for the transportation of the cargo for export and import from the Defendant, and claimed transportation charges and received them.

C. On the other hand, C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) supplied goods, such as fibers, from the Defendant, with goods, due to defects in goods or delay in the payment period, requested the Plaintiff to perform transportation-related duties, and the Defendant, other than C, bears transport charges. The Plaintiff confirmed whether C-related transport charges are to be borne by the Defendant, and filed a claim for transport charges to the Defendant after completion of the relevant duties.

The plaintiff has issued a tax invoice to the defendant by October 2015, including the portion requested to be transported by C.

However, around October 2015, the Defendant divided into the part directly transported by the Defendant and the part directly consigned, and issued the tax invoice to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff entered the tax invoice on the portion directly requested by the Defendant from November 2015, 2015 as “B (self-export and import)” in the trade name column and issued the tax invoice on the portion consigned’s commission.

E. On August 17, 2016, C notified the Defendant and the subcontractor of the purport that the financial institution will cease to exist by e-mail, etc.

Accordingly, on August 18, 2016, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a certificate of content that the Defendant did not have any obligation to pay the amount of KRW 10,072,180, out of KRW 13,360,180 claimed to the Defendant from December 2015 to June 2016.

F. The Plaintiff in 2009.

arrow