logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원부천지원 2015.05.26 2012가단43944
물품대금
Text

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s KRW 36,537,719 and its amount from January 1, 2013 to May 26, 2015.

Reasons

Basic Facts

Since 2009, the Plaintiff was supplied with original PP PP Polprool film (OPed Polpropye; hereinafter “instant original company”) by the Defendant, and was supplied to the Defendant with synthetic resin (PPolprole films) films, which was produced by carrying out de facto co-rating on the outside, and attempted to occupy the inner side of the product (Polprole films, hereinafter “instant product”).

The Defendant ordered the instant product from M&C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “M”) which is a broker trader, ordered the instant original product to the Plaintiff and supplied it to the Defendant, and sold the instant product supplied by the Plaintiff to M&C trade as it is, and MYR-600 again sold the instant product (name of the product: KSY-600) to the Large Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Japan”) located in Japan.

The product of this case was cut in the Rol shape of rolll, and the defendant examined part of the product of this case and received it from the plaintiff.

From April 2012 to September 2012, the Defendant did not pay the price for the instant product supplied by the Plaintiff. From September 2012, the Plaintiff had the same year to the Plaintiff.

8. 2,966,823 won on the ground that the goods of this case supplied on November, 201 were removed, the goods of this case, and the same year.

9. 13. Giving notice to the effect that each of 5,412,640 won shall be deducted on the ground that the goods of this case supplied fall short of the delivery capacity.

[Ground of recognition] Fact-finding without dispute, Eul evidence 7-1 and 2, fact-finding conducted by this court on M&C trade, the plaintiff's judgment on the ground of claim as to the whole purport of the argument as to the ground of claim as to the goods of this case supplied to the defendant during the period from April 2012 to September 2012 (hereinafter "price for goods of this case") is 43,147,057.

arrow