logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.03 2018가단5036604
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 18,671,735 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from March 9, 2018 to December 3, 2018.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is engaged in the wholesale business of livestock products under the trade name of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C building and 1st floor D, and the Defendant operated the restaurant under the trade name of “G” in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F.

B. The Plaintiff supplied meat to the Defendant from January 16, 2016 to March 8, 2017. The amount of goods not paid by the Defendant is KRW 3,671,735.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant offered to the Plaintiff that the unit price of the meat supplied by the Plaintiff is excessively higher than that of other businesses. Accordingly, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to reduce the amount of KRW 15 million out of the unpaid goods on or before February 23, 2017, and pay it within six months.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant agreement”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including branch numbers), witness H and I’s testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 18,671,735 won (the 33,671,735 won for unpaid goods - the 15 million won reduced by the agreement of this case) and damages for delay.

B. Regarding the claim of KRW 15 million reduced according to the instant agreement, the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) agreed on the instant agreement with the Defendant on the condition that the Plaintiff maintain transaction relations with the Defendant. Since then, the Defendant was supplied with goods at a reduced price of up to three times from the Plaintiff until March 8, 2017, and then changed the transaction with the Plaintiff to the other company. The said agreement on the condition of continuous transaction is invalid as the conditions are not fulfilled due to the Defendant’s fault. Accordingly, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the price of goods reduced pursuant to the said agreement, KRW 15 million, and delay damages therefrom.

arrow