logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.04.17 2018나2054645
물품대금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

The defendant of the purport of the claim shall make the plaintiff 108,791.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is that the reasoning of the judgment is stated in the judgment of the court of first instance except for dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, it is citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary or additional parts] The first instance court’s “C division” under the attached Table 3 of the judgment of the first instance court is regarded as “C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”)”.

According to the third letter of the judgment of the court of first instance, the "Plaintiff" in the second letter is referred to as "Defendant".

The defendant did not know or explain the 4th decision of the first instance court, the 12th decision, and the 13th decision.

'The portion' is as follows:

【2) The Defendant did not explain to the Plaintiff the terms and conditions to the effect that the sales proceeds accrued between the Plaintiff and C cannot be settled by debit cards. Thus, the pertinent terms and conditions cannot be asserted as the content of the instant contract.

[Attachment 5] 7 to 9 of the first instance judgment is as follows. 2) Of the price under a rice supply contract between the Plaintiff and C claimed by the Plaintiff, KRW 54 million, the Plaintiff did not have been supplied with rice equivalent to the above amount, and the Plaintiff voluntarily released rice to F at the request of C without D’s consent. Thus, the Defendant is not obliged to pay the above amount. 5. 5. 12 through 6. 10 of the first instance judgment is as follows.

A. As to the Defendant’s argument that there was no obligation to repay the previous transaction price settlement portion, the Defendant stated that the Defendant itself recognizes the Defendant’s obligation to pay for the supply of goods equivalent to KRW 384,626,150 to the Plaintiff on the first date for pleading of the first instance trial. This is the amount of KRW 384,626,150, including the Plaintiff and C up to KRW 50,000 on January 26, 2018, and the amount of KRW 384,626,150, written sales slip with the Defendant’s approval for the transaction as the pre-paid card issued by

arrow