(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2016.10.27 2015가단17649

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2016.10.27 2015가단17649

매매대금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 153,702,200 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 20% per annum from August 28, 2015 to September 30, 2015.

Reasons

1. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including the number of branch numbers), it is recognized that the plaintiff entered into a goods transaction agreement with the defendant around May 24, 2013, and supplied the defendant with goods equivalent to the sum of KRW 496,958,970, such as taxation, etc. from May 28, 2013 to October 8, 2014, and the defendant paid the plaintiff the total amount of KRW 341,021,970 from May 28, 2013 to October 2014, and returned the goods equivalent to KRW 2,234,800 to the plaintiff.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 153,702,200 won for the unpaid goods (496,958,970 won - 341,021,970 won - 2,234,800 won) and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from August 28, 2015 to September 30, 2015, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, to the day after the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case, and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. The defendant's argument concerning the defendant's assertion argues that the plaintiff notified the plaintiff of his refusal to trade because of defects in quality such as the taxation supplied by the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff agreed to reduce the price of KRW 140,000,000 out of the price of the goods in order to maintain the transaction with the defendant.

However, only the evidence submitted by the defendant was defective in the quality of the taxation supplied by the plaintiff.

In addition, it is insufficient to recognize that there was a reduction agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the price of goods, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the defendant's argument about this is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2018.04.20 2016나52569

-수원지방법원 2019.04.16 2018가단15556

-서울남부지방법원 2015.09.11 2014가단71143

-창원지방법원 2017.08.10 2017가단6989

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.21 2015가단5297606