logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.11.26 2019나5656
물품대금
Text

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion was a person operating a mutual stressed fire fighting in Busan Jung-gu, Busan, and entered into a contract with the Defendant to supply goods necessary for the Plaintiff’s above business from the Defendant around January 201, 2018. On January 11, 2018, the Defendant was paid KRW 5,000,000 from the Plaintiff as the price for the goods, and supplied only the goods equivalent to KRW 9,00,000, and did not supply the goods equivalent to KRW 4,100,000. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 4,10,000 and damages for delay.

2. Determination

A. In case of remitting money to another person’s deposit account by transferring the money, etc., the remittance can be based on a variety of legal causes. Thus, the fact that the remitted money is the price for goods under a contract for the supply of goods with the person who receives it and the party who asserts it has the burden of proof.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2014Da26187 Decided July 10, 2014, supra). B.

According to the statements in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the defendant operated D's mutual stressed fire fighting from August 10, 2017 to his domicile. The plaintiff operated the same mutual stressed fire fighting at the plaintiff's domicile from January 19, 2018 to the plaintiff's domicile, and the plaintiff remitted KRW 5,000,000 to the defendant's account on January 11, 2018 (hereinafter "the money of this case").

However, it is difficult to understand that there was a commodity supply contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the following grounds: (i) no objective data, such as a commodity supply contract, an order, a quotation, and a receipt, which may prove that there was a goods supply contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant as alleged by the Plaintiff, is submitted; and (ii) there is no specific content between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

arrow