logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2020.05.28 2019가단255
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 46,608,070 for the Plaintiff and KRW 15% per annum from December 11, 2018 to May 31, 2019.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. According to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, and 9 as well as the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff is a person who engages in wholesale and retail business of building materials with the trade name of “E,” and the Defendant is a company that has engaged in incidental civil works among the construction works of the F apartment construction works at the Government-si. ② The Plaintiff can be acknowledged that the Plaintiff supplied several times to the Defendant a total of KRW 160,259,770 from March 25, 2018 to October 16, 2018. The Plaintiff received reimbursement of KRW 113,651,70 among the construction materials supplied by the Defendant as above.

According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 46,608,070 won for unpaid construction materials (i.e., KRW 160,259,770 - KRW 113,651,70) and damages for delay calculated at the annual rate of 12% per annum as stipulated in the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (amended by Presidential Decree No. 29768, May 21, 2019) from December 11, 2018 to May 31, 2019, the day following the delivery date of the original copy of the instant payment order, which is the day after the Plaintiff supplied the said construction materials to the Defendant, barring any special circumstances.

B. The Defendant asserted that construction materials supplied by the Plaintiff were KRW 145,752,002, but according to the result of the response to the order to submit taxation information and the whole pleadings of this court on January 7, 2020, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff filed a purchase report on the total amount of sales electronic tax invoices issued by the Plaintiff against the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is rejected.

2. The plaintiff's claim is justified and acceptable.

arrow