logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2016.07.12 2015가단34771
물품대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff supplied steel materials at the construction site of the building B (hereinafter “B”) at the time when the Defendant was newly constructed.

In lieu of paying the above steel price to the Plaintiff, the Defendant, in violation of this, completed the registration of ownership transfer to a limited liability company on June 2015, even though the building Nos. 205 (100 million won) was offered as payment in kind (hereinafter “instant payment in kind”).

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount equivalent to 100 million won equivalent to the sale price due to the nonperformance of obligation and damages for delay.

B. The judgment of the court of this case is not sufficient to acknowledge only the descriptions of the health unit Gap, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including each number) as to whether the party who entered into the instant payment contract with the plaintiff is the defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove this.

Rather, the following circumstances can be acknowledged by integrating the whole purport of the pleadings in the statement Nos. 1-1 and 2, namely, a written contract for the sale of a tenement house (Evidence No. 1-1) and a written certificate for the full payment of the house sale price (Evidence No. 1-2) claimed by the Plaintiff as the basis of the instant contract for the payment of the substitute house, which are written by C, the Defendant did not appear at the place where the above written contract for the sale of a apartment house and the written certificate for the full payment of the house sale price was written by C, and the Defendant’s certificate of the personal seal (Evidence No. 1-3) delivered by C to the Plaintiff upon the preparation of the above written contract for the sale of a

It is difficult to see that the defendant entrusted C with the right to prepare the above documents with regard to the preparation of the above apartment house sales contract and the house sales certificate, and even if the defendant entrusted C with the right to prepare the above documents, the above documents are prepared in the name of "(State) D Representative A".

arrow