logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.09.05 2014나6395
물품대금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal and the request for return of provisional payment are all dismissed.

2. Expenses for filing an appeal, and those for filing an application for the return of provisional payments.

Reasons

1. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 9 (including the main number; hereinafter the same shall apply) as to the cause of the claim and the entire arguments, the plaintiff is a company that manufactures and installs road traffic safety signs, and the defendant is a company that manufactures and sells safety signs, etc., and the plaintiff is a company that manufactures and sells safety facilities from August 13, 2001 to July 12, 201 and provides the defendant with traffic signs, etc. equivalent to the total amount of KRW 173,188,290 to the defendant from February 15, 2002 to September 9, 201, and received KRW 156,838,920 as the price of the goods from the defendant from September 15, 201 to September 20, 201. Thus, the defendant is an obligation to provide the plaintiff with a copy of the lawsuit at the rate of 16,349,370 won (=173,18,290 won, 15068.28) to the plaintiff

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. On the ground of the assertion on the credibility of evidence, the Defendant’s evidence No. 6 (the director of the outstanding amount and the director of the outstanding amount, hereinafter “the director of the outstanding amount”).

) The Plaintiff voluntarily prepared, and there is a difference in the transaction amount between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, even if the transaction amount did not have been made with or without the Defendant, and there was an omission in the amount of the goods paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff in the year 2002, and the Defendant’s contents were not reliable, and thus, the above evidence should be rejected. (2) However, the following circumstances are revealed in light of the aforementioned purport of evidence, evidence Nos. 4, 5, and 7 as well as the entire arguments.

① On May 26, 2010, prior to the filing of the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff: (a) the Defendant was provided with road signs from the Plaintiff on May 26, 201; and (b) the amount of goods sold by the Defendant.

arrow