logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 여주지원 2018.10.02 2017가단7684
물품대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

The plaintiff is a corporation that engages in timber processing business, etc., and the defendant is a corporation that sells construction materials.

The Plaintiff supplied the Defendant via Company A with Chapter 9,012 (the total value of KRW 49,590,720) of the product “humba” on six occasions from September 20, 2016 to July 12, 2017, on six occasions.

The defendant paid the price of the above product to A in cash or remitted it to the account in the name of B designated by A.

(Reasons for recognition) Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings.

The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff supplied the defendant with 58,296,720 won in total.

Although the defendant asserts that he paid part of the price to A, it cannot be recognized that the amount paid in cash to A or deposited into the account in the name of B without depositing it into the corporate account of the plaintiff being used in the collection of ordinary goods.

Therefore, the defendant shall pay the above price to the plaintiff.

The defendant paid all the price of goods to the plaintiff's employee A.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is improper.

Judgment

As seen earlier, the Defendant received the Plaintiff’s total product value of KRW 49,590,720 through the Plaintiff’s employee A.

[Plaintiff’s assertion that the goods indicated in the electronic tax invoice (Evidence A No. 1-2) of May 4, 2017 are also supplied to the Defendant. However, considering the following: (a) the above tax invoice can be unilaterally issued by the Plaintiff even without the Defendant’s consent; and (b) there is no evidence to verify that the Defendant was refunded tax with the above tax invoice, it is difficult to recognize that the Plaintiff supplied the above goods to the Defendant; and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise). However, the method of paying the Plaintiff’s employees in cash or the name B designated by the Defendant B.

arrow