(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.12 2017가합543190

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.12 2017가합543190

물품대금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 328,727,020 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from June 14, 2017 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who runs a wholesale business, etc. in the trade name of “C,” and the Defendant is a person who closes the said business at the end of December 2016 while running a wholesale and retail business in the trade name of “D.”

B. From around 2006, the Plaintiff and the Defendant continuously supplied the Defendant with the disturbance (hereinafter “instant goods transaction”) and terminated the instant goods transaction around the end of December 2016 due to the Defendant’s closure of business.

C. On May 24, 2017, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail demanding the payment of KRW 328,727,020 for attempted goods arising from the instant goods transaction. On May 30, 2017, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a content-certified mail stating that no outstanding amount exists, but returned.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 5 and 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) supplied disturbance to the Defendant at least two to three times a week, and prepared and delivered a statement of transaction in which the item, quantity, unit price, and supply price in the receipt form to the Defendant on a one-time basis. According to the transaction statement issued by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, the Plaintiff supplied a column equivalent to KRW 328,727,020 from March 30, 2016 to December 20, 2016, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 328,727,020 as well as damages for delay. 2) The amount that the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff by December 18, 2016 is the amount of goods for the column that the Plaintiff supplied to the Defendant by March 23, 2016.

The price for the goods supplied by the Plaintiff from February 24, 2015 to March 23, 2016 and the amount repaid by the Defendant from September 6, 2015 to December 18, 2016 are almost identical.

B. The defendant's assertion 1 did not receive a statement of transaction from the plaintiff.

The transaction statement submitted by the Plaintiff is merely prepared by the Plaintiff, and it can specify the price of goods based thereon.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 목포지원 2018.10.31 2017가단55191

-전주지방법원정읍지원 2019.03.05 2018가단10102

-수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.06.21 2017가단3121

-전주지방법원 2018.09.12 2018가단12393

-광주지방법원 목포지원 2018.12.12 2018가단53130