beta
Text
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 44,400,000 won and 6% per annum from December 1, 2013 to December 8, 2014.
Reasons
1. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. (1) On November 19, 2012, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant Company A (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) with fertilizers equivalent to KRW 49,500,000.
(2) On December 31, 2012, the Plaintiff prepared a loan certificate between the Defendant Company and the Defendant Company to receive KRW 49,500,000 as the fertilizer price by November 30, 2013, and the Defendant B jointly and severally guaranteed the loan certificate.
(3) From April 2013 to May 2014, 2014, Defendant Company repaid KRW 5,100,000 to the Plaintiff.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, purport of whole pleadings
B. Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 44,400,000 won (49,500,000 won-5,100,000 won) and damages for delay at each rate of 6% per annum prescribed by the Commercial Act from December 1, 2013 to December 8, 2014, which is the service date of a copy of the complaint in this case, from the date following the due date to the date of repayment, and 20% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date of full payment.
2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion
A. The Defendants asserted that the Defendants unilaterally designated the goods and sent them using commercial cargo vehicles after the Plaintiff unilaterally designated them, and that the Defendants promised to provide sales assistance and return some of the goods in the future, and that the remaining inventory goods are equivalent to KRW 37,364,00,00, and thus, they cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim.
B. The Defendants’ assertion as to No. 1, which appears consistent with the above facts, is difficult to believe because they do not differ from the Defendants’ assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.