beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with the goods equivalent to KRW 11,518,320, such as the contact tape (hereinafter “instant goods”) from September 27, 2012 to January 30, 2013, on the grounds that there is no dispute between the parties, and barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the price of the said goods 11,518,320, and delay damages.
2. Judgment on the defendant's defense
A. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant repaid the amount of KRW 13.5 million to the employees of Korea Credit Information Company C, a debt collection company requested by the Plaintiff, to pay for the instant goods amounting to KRW 13.5 million.
As to this, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the Plaintiff received KRW 13.5 million from April 201 to March 201, as the price for the goods that the Plaintiff supplied to C, and that it was not paid as the price for the goods of this case.
B. In full view of the evidence No. 2, evidence No. 1, No. 2, and No. 3, evidence No. 1, 2, and 3, witness D and C’s testimony and the purport of the whole arguments, the following facts are recognized:
1) From April 201 to March 2012, the Plaintiff supplied the goods equivalent to KRW 27,370,660 to the Defendant and D, and the Defendant and D did not pay the said goods, the Plaintiff filed an application for the payment order with the Suwon District Court for the payment of the said goods at KRW 201 tea1560.2) Accordingly, on April 24, 2012, the Suwon District Court rendered the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) stating that “the Defendant and D jointly and severally paid the amount of KRW 27,370,660, and the amount calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from April 28, 2012 to the date of full payment,” and the said payment order became final and conclusive on May 12, 2012.
3) Since May 21, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for a movable auction on the D-owned machinery based on the instant payment order, which became final and conclusive on May 21, 2012. (4) The Plaintiff withdrawn the said application for a movable auction on July 21, 2012.