2014 Ghana373 Payments for Goods

A

Cheongdam Co., Ltd.

April 3, 2015

May 1, 2015

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 43,449,660 won with 20% interest per annum from February 7, 2014 to the day of complete payment.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a personal entrepreneur who runs the wholesale and retail business of steel products and construction materials with the trade name of "B", and the defendant is a company that runs the construction business.

B. During the period from September 26, 2013 to January 28, 2014, the Plaintiff supplied goods, including construction materials, to each construction site of Cbong Construction Work (hereinafter referred to as the “One Construction Work”), D Sungsung Construction Work (hereinafter referred to as the “instant 2 Construction Work”), and E Elementary School Multi-Purpose Class (hereinafter referred to as the “three Construction Works”), and 43,449,660 out of the price of the said goods (2,905,100 won at the instant 1 Construction Site + KRW 1,056,00 at the instant 2 Construction Site + KRW 39,48,560 at the instant 3 Construction Site).

C. On the other hand, around September 2013, the Defendant entered into a subcontract on the part of reinforced concrete construction among the instant three construction works with Ewon Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Ewon Construction”) and the instant three construction works, and the Ewon Construction performed the said construction works around that time.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 1 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff;

As the Plaintiff supplied construction materials to the Defendant with respect to the instant construction works 1, 2, and 3, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of 43,449,660 won due and delay damages therefrom.

B. Defendant

The Defendant’s goods supplied to the Plaintiff are goods (2,905,100 won + 1,056,00 won) that the Plaintiff supplied to the Plaintiff at the instant 1 and 2 construction site and some goods (1,451,450 won) supplied at the instant 3 construction site. The Defendant’s remainder of the goods supplied at the instant 3 construction site is 38,037,110 won (hereinafter “the instant goods”). As such, the Defendant, not the Defendant, is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 5,412,50,00,00 to the Plaintiff, while the Defendant is not obligated to pay the price of the instant goods.

3. Determination

A. As to the person liable to pay the price of the instant goods

1) Facts of recognition

① At the time of delivery of the instant goods at the instant three construction site, the Plaintiff was signed by the acquirer in a trade new letter stating that the Plaintiff returned to or returned to “Cheongdam Construction (E Elementary School)” (E Elementary School) at the time of delivery of the instant goods.

② The Plaintiff issued a tax invoice on the instant goods price in the name of the Defendant four times, and the Defendant also purchased each of the said tax invoices.

(3) The defendant failed to report to the competent authority the conclusion of the subcontract agreement with the construction of Eulwon because he/she failed to obtain a performance bond for construction of Eulwon.

(4) No one shall conclude a contract with the defendant on the supply of goods with construction materials prior to the instant case.

[Reasons for Recognition] The aforementioned evidence and each description of Eul evidence Nos. 8 and 9, witness F, G, H, and I's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings

2) Determination

In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the facts acknowledged earlier and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, ① all transaction specifications and tax invoices issued by the Plaintiff in relation to the price of the instant goods, and the Defendant, despite being aware of such fact, was stated as “Defendant.” The Defendant, despite being aware of such fact, did not raise any objection to the Plaintiff. ② The Plaintiff continued to engage in the instant 1 and 2 transactions with the Defendant, other than the instant 3 construction works, while the Plaintiff did not engage in the instant 1 and 2 transactions with the Plaintiff before the instant case, and ③ the NA Construction did not have good credit standing to the extent that it would not be issued a performance insurance policy, ③ the NA Construction continued to supply the instant goods to the NA Construction without any specific reason, separate from the Defendant who had continued to engage in the continuous transaction. Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to pay the instant goods to the Plaintiff as a party to the goods supply contract.

B. Sub-determination

The fact that the price of the instant goods and the price of the goods unpaid by the Defendant bearing the duty to pay the goods are KRW 43,449,660 ( KRW 38,037,110 + KRW 5,412,50) are as seen earlier. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc. from February 7, 2014 to the date of delivery of the original copy of the instant payment order, as sought by the Plaintiff.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is decided as per Disposition by admitting it.

Judges Jeon Jae-chul