(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2021.02.16 2020가단7084

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2021.02.16 2020가단7084

추심금

Text

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 150,000,000 won with 12% per annum from October 6, 2020 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. In full view of the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff received a seizure and collection order ("the collection order of this case") against the non-party corporation D's defendant as to "the claim amount based on the claim amount based on the original copy of C Law Firm No. 324, Sept. 1, 2020, as Daejeon District Court Branch Decision 2020, Sept. 1, 2020, as to the non-party corporation D's defendant as to "the title, glass, and other claims based on the subcontract price and other claims among the non-party corporation's multi-household construction of the non-party corporation E and the non-party corporation's defendant as 4543, Sep. 1, 2020; the collection order of this case was delivered to the defendant on Sep. 7, 2020; the contract amount of D and the defendant newly constructed the housing Corporation as 30,018.

Therefore, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 150,00,000 and the amount of damages for delay at the rate of 12% per annum from October 6, 2020 to the date of full payment, which is clear that the Defendant is served with the duplicate of the instant complaint.

2. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant did not conclude a subcontract or a goods supply contract with D Co., Ltd., and the Defendant did not have a construction work in the E and 7 parcels in the river. However, the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to acknowledge the Defendant’s assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, according to the evidence evidence No. 3 as seen earlier, the Defendant can only recognize the fact that the contract was concluded for the new construction of multi-household housing on May 19, 2018 between D and E and 7 parcels in the river as of May 19, 2018.

Therefore, the defendant's argument is without merit.

3. The conclusion is that the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2019.06.14 2018나2068088

-부산고등법원 2017.05.17 2015나56376

-대전지방법원 2014.06.26 2014고합4

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.07.17 2018가합555992

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.25 2017가합519296