logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.05.17 2017가단24294
물품대금
Text

1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 45,592,200 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from October 31, 2017 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. As to the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B, the Plaintiff engaged in Do and retail business with the trade name “E” in Busan-gu D market, Busan-gu, and the Defendant B, who operates the Busan-gu Maritime Transport Daegu F (hereinafter “instant excess”) with an excessive supply of goods between April 2013 and June 28, 2014, claimed that the amount of goods that was not received was KRW 45,592,200 (hereinafter “the instant goods price”), the Defendant B shall be deemed to have led to the confession pursuant to Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Thus, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 45,592,200 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from October 31, 2017 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the Plaintiff.

2. The Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant C is the spouse of Defendant B, and Defendant C was supplied with work from the Plaintiff while running the instant task together with Defendant B, and accordingly, Defendant C also has a duty to jointly and severally with Defendant B to repay the price of the instant goods to the Plaintiff.

In full view of the statements in Gap evidence No. 3 and the purport of the entire pleadings in witness G’s testimony, the Defendants may recognize the fact that they are married couples, and the fact that defendant C sold work or paid the outstanding amount to the plaintiff at the Japan branch of this case. However, it is insufficient to recognize that Defendant C was supplied work with the plaintiff while operating the Japan branch of this case together with Defendant B, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion.

3. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is justified, and the plaintiff's claim against the defendant C is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow