logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.11.28 2018나4374
청구이의
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. The Taean District Court of the Daejeon District Court.

Reasons

1. The Defendant, on September 20, 201 to June 2, 2012, filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order of KRW 2,794,116 (hereinafter “instant oil payment order”) with the Daejeon District Court, Seosan Branch Court Decision 2013Ra14 (hereinafter “instant oil payment claim”) against the Plaintiff on April 8, 201, asserting that the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff with oil on credit from around September 20, 201 to June 2, 201, and that the Plaintiff remains at KRW 2,794,116 (hereinafter “instant oil payment order”), and the Defendant received the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) with the purport that “the Plaintiff would pay the Defendant the amount of KRW 2,794,116 and the damages for delay at a rate of 20% per annum from the day after the original copy of the payment order was served. It became final and conclusive at that time.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings]

2. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment

A. On September 201, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement for heavy equipment with C&A (hereinafter “instant corporation”) which is a contractor for the construction of D’s site extension (hereinafter “instant construction”) and carried out the instant construction. As the instant corporation bears the burden of oil expenses, the instant corporation was supplied with oil from the Defendant and provided the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff did not receive oil from the Defendant.

In addition, the claim of the oil expense of this case was extinguished after the payment order of this case was fully repaid.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case should not be allowed.

B. According to the evidence Nos. 4 and 2 evidence, the Plaintiff agreed to lease the instant corporation and the equipment and facilities owned by the Plaintiff for three months from September 16, 201, and agreed to carry out the instant construction, and the oil cost was borne by the instant corporation. Of the oil price, part of the instant oil price was paid by E, F, etc., the actual relation of the instant corporation, can be acknowledged.

arrow