beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the statements in Evidence Nos. 2-1 through 6, evidence Nos. 4-2, 3, and 5-1 through 5, and evidence Nos. 5-1, 5-2, and 1, it is recognized that the Plaintiff traded with the Defendant, including the supply of machinery parts or the provision of repair services from August 2014 to February 2015, and that the Defendant supplied goods or the provision of services equivalent to a total of KRW 10,147,060 to the Defendant (the Defendant asserted that only the tax invoice issued by the Plaintiff cannot be recognized that the supply of the above goods or the provision of services was made. However, the Defendant reported value-added tax pursuant to the same tax invoice and deducted the input tax amount, and the above specification of transactions coincide with the details of the transaction statement and paper prepared at that time by the Plaintiff as well as the electronic tax invoice issued by the Plaintiff
Meanwhile, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant to claim only KRW 1,300,000 in the amount of “repair Costs” provided on or around August 2014, 2014, and KRW 2,090,000 for “A/S Acceptance” provided on or around February 21, 2015, as agreed with the Defendant to claim for reimbursement of KRW 1,30,000 by reducing the amount of KRW 1,30,000. Barring any special circumstances, the Defendant, barring any other special circumstance, is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 6,227,060 [10,147,060 for goods or services - KRW 3,080,00 for “repair Costs” around August 2014; KRW 2,090,000 for “A/S Acceptance”; KRW 1,300,000 for delay damages calculated on or around February 2, 2015]; and KRW 305,000.7.
2. Judgment on the defendant's defense, etc.
A. The Defendant asserted extinctive prescription: (a) the Plaintiff’s claim is subject to the short-term extinctive prescription of three years pursuant to Article 163 subparag. 6 of the Civil Act as consideration for the products and goods sold by the producer and merchant; and (b) the Plaintiff’s claim on the electronic tax invoice dated August 30, 2014