logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.03.22 2018나44748
물품대금
Text

1. Defendant C’s appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a merchant who operates a dental laboratory with the trade name “Dental Laboratory.”

B. On July 9, 2010, the E Association (hereinafter “E Association”) opened a dental clinic (hereinafter “G dental clinic”) with the trade name “E Association affiliated dental clinic (G dental clinic)” on the F and 2nd floor of Jung-gu, Seoul.

Defendant C was employed by G Dental and worked as a dentist.

C. In September 2013, the Plaintiff continued to supply dental treatment, etc. to G dental hospitals. Accordingly, the amount payable for G dental treatment amounted to KRW 32,070,50 as of September 9, 2013.

The Plaintiff received KRW 1,00,000,000 on September 12, 2012, 201, and KRW 2,000,000 on September 16, 2013, and KRW 1,00,00,000 on September 27, 2013, in the name of “E Cooperatives, A dental clinic (G dental clinic),” respectively.

E. On September 9, 2013, Defendant B opened a dental clinic and completed its business registration under the name of the H building and the 8th floor of Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “I dental clinic” (hereinafter “I dental clinic”).

F. From around that time, the Plaintiff supplied I’s dental services worth KRW 57,246,50,000, and received a total of KRW 61,000,000 from October 17, 2013 to August 18, 2014 in the name of “B (I).”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 6, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. As the Plaintiff’s claim practically operated G D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D, and the actual party to the said goods transaction, the Plaintiff demanded payment of the above amount.

B. G dental services asserted by the Defendants are operated by E-Unions, a legal entity, while I dental services are performed by I.D.

arrow