logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.10.13 2015가단31046
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 21,583,160 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from August 22, 2015 to September 30, 2015.

Reasons

Basic Facts

According to the facts that there is no dispute between the parties, the Plaintiff is an agent of GSk-Tex and the Defendant is a person supplied with oil by the Plaintiff while operating the gas station and C gas station, etc., and the Plaintiff leased the gas station located in D on November 20, 2014 from E, and on January 23, 2015, the Plaintiff was in office for each of the Defendant on a deposit of KRW 100 million, monthly rent of KRW 33000 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”), and around July 8, 2015, the said lease contract was agreed upon, and the said deposit is unregistered.

In this case, the Plaintiff asserted that the remainder of the oil price as of July 8, 2015 is KRW 121,583,160, which is the sum of KRW 46,373,160, and KRW 75,210,000, which is the sum of the unpaid oil price of the gas station B, and KRW 21,583,160, which is the remainder remaining after offseting the lease deposit to the Defendant.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that if the deposit is set off from the balance of the oil price, the amount of the deposit should be extinguished, and rather the defendant should receive the refund of KRW 20,914,000 in the balance of the deposit.

The parts of the dispute concerning the above oil payment are as follows, and there is no dispute over the details and amount of oil payment claimed by the plaintiff.

On January 26, 2015, G, which is at issue as to whether it is appropriated as the Friju oil oil price, is KRW 19,700,000 out of the card payment of KRW 29,550,000 and KRW 13,525,00 out of KRW 26,175,000 deposited on June 5, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that it was appropriated as the Friju oil oil price, while the Defendant and G were paid as the Friju oil price, on the other hand, the Defendant were paid as the Friju oil price, while the Defendant and G merely provided temporary assistance to the Defendant’s oil business not between husband and wife, and G were irrelevant to G, and G introduced the Plaintiff to H.

arrow