beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 41,725,572 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from February 16, 2016 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a company engaged in the textile processing business, and the Defendant is a person engaged in the wholesale and retail business of the raw body and clothing with the trade name “B”.
B. The Plaintiff entered into an original supply contract between the Defendant and the Plaintiff to supply the original base by dyping it to the Defendant, and supplied the original base to the Defendant from March 31, 2015 to May 31, 2015, but did not receive KRW 41,725,572 out of the price for the original base for which the supply was completed by the Defendant.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Gap evidence No. 5-1 to 16, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 41,725,572 payable to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance, and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from February 16, 2016 to the day of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks.
B. In addition to the original supply supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, the Defendant did not supply 15,00 YD equivalent to the supply price of KRW 22,50,000,000, in addition to the original supply price of KRW 15,000, and the Defendant did not supply it to other trading companies, thereby causing damages equivalent to KRW 180,000,00, and thus, the Defendant’s claim for the payment of the unpaid original payment was unjust. The Defendant asserts that even if there was a original supply that was not supplied by the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s claim for damages arising from the Plaintiff’s refusal to supply the original supply is separate from the Defendant’s claim for damages arising from the Plaintiff’s refusal to supply the original supply. This does not affect the existence and scope of the Defendant’s obligation to pay the original payment of KRW 41,725,572 against the Plaintiff, and this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit
Even if the defendant's above assertion is a set-off.