logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.03.10 2015나11572
물품대금
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, with respect to the Defendant’s KRW 90,360,854, among the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 89,190,256, from December 23, 2011 to the Plaintiff, and KRW 790.

Reasons

1. Presumed facts

A. C around 2004, around 2005, from “H” to “I,” “electric source medicine” to “electric source medicine,” and from around 2007, from “the Plaintiff’s company as a drug seller,” and the Defendant was supplied with drugs from the above company from February 2004 to “B hospital.”

B. The purchase of drugs through C by the hospital B was normally conducted in the following manner:

① When the employee in charge of the Defendant or B Hospital orders the medicine to C by determining the items and quantity of the medicine, the employee in charge of the medicine prepared a substitute for the medicine such as the name, size, quantity, etc. stated in the original order for the medicine delivered with the medicine.

② After that, C, who visited the hospital, received a copy of the original order from the hospital, and substituted the contents of the original order, check the transaction statement stating the name of the drug, unit price, supply price, etc., and check the confirmation sheet between the individual medicine quantity column and the price column in the drug transaction place.

③ In the event of partial reimbursement of the drug price, the employee in charge has stamped the confirmation letter on the side of the part containing the cumulative balance of the drug transaction book, and the Defendant also confirmed the drug transaction book according to the case and signed on the side of the cumulative balance.

C. Even after the transfer of the Plaintiff Company, C prepared a trading statement with the Defendant on the basis of the cumulative balance of the existing pharmaceutical trading place between the previous pharmaceutical company and the Defendant. From June 15, 201, from around June 15, 201, C used a trading statement in which the name of the Plaintiff Company was entered (hereinafter “instant trading statement”).

As used in the transaction of the Plaintiff Company’s pharmaceutical products, the name, quantity, unit price, supply price, and the amount and balance of the Plaintiff’s pharmaceutical products supplied to the customer are stated.

arrow