beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 101,443,675 for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from December 7, 2017 to March 27, 2018.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff, who engages in the wholesale, retail, and processing sales of fishery products, supplied fishery products (hereinafter “instant goods”) from March 1, 2016 to November 27, 2017, upon receiving a request for the supply of fishery products from the Defendant running the wedding business and restaurant business.
B. When the Plaintiff supplies goods along with a trade statement, the Defendant traded goods by confirming and signing the transaction details and transaction amount. As of November 27, 2017, the instant goods price reached KRW 100,360,075.
C. The Defendant paid KRW 4,00,000 as the price for the instant goods on December 4, 2017, and received an additional supply from the Plaintiff for fishery products, such as 4,515,600 won, around December 5, 2017 and 568,00 won, around December 6, 2017.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including a provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remaining amount of KRW 101,443,675 (=100,360,075 won - 4,000,000 won - 4,515,600 won - 568,000 won from the date following the last supply date, as the Plaintiff seeks, 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from December 7, 2017 until March 27, 2018 when the application for change of the purport of the claim and cause of the claim of this case was served on the Defendant, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of full payment.
B. Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant asserts that the agreement on the supply of the instant goods is unfair and invalid, and that the supply price of the instant goods should be reduced by 20% because the unit price of the instant goods supplied by the Plaintiff exceeds 20% compared to other enterprises. 2) The price is determined according to the terms of the agreement on the supply of the instant goods concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and otherwise, the Plaintiff supplied.