logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원군산지원 2015.03.12 2014가합2077
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 195,697,095 won and 20% interest per annum from December 5, 2014 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. On July 25, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) sold the products produced by the Plaintiff or the products purchased from a third party; and (b) entered into a contract for the supply of goods to be paid as of the end of the month following the delivery of the goods; (c) the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation to the Plaintiff for the payment of goods to the Plaintiff; and (d) the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the amount of goods worth KRW 195,697,095 in total from July 25, 2014 to September 2014 (= KRW 89,95,620,00 around July 2014). There is no dispute between the parties to the contract on delivery of the goods (= KRW 105,701,475, around September 9, 2014).

Therefore, the Defendant, barring special circumstances, is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the price of goods KRW 195,697,095 and damages for delay of 20% per annum from December 5, 2014, which is the day following the delivery date of the instant payment order, to the day of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks.

2. The Defendant’s assertion argues that the instant litigation proceedings against the Defendant, which is a joint guarantor, shall be interrupted inasmuch as the Defendant received a decision on commencing the rehabilitation procedure for dice, which is the primary debtor, pursuant to Article 59(1) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act.

However, Article 59(1) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that "when a decision has been made to commence rehabilitation proceedings, the proceedings relating to the debtor's property shall be interrupted." Thus, the proceedings which are interrupted pursuant to the above provisions are only the proceedings about the ethyl, a principal debtor, not the proceedings against the defendant, a joint guarantor, not the proceedings against the joint guarantor. In addition, even if the rehabilitation plan has been issued in the rehabilitation procedure for the ethyl as a principal debtor, the plaintiff's rights against the defendant, a joint guarantor, do not affect any other rights, and Article 250

arrow