logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.11.10 2016가단5281
용역대금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 23,380,50 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from May 24, 2016 to November 10, 2016.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of each entry in Gap evidence 18, 21, 22, and 23 (including provisional numbers) and the entire purport of the pleadings:

The representative director C of the defendant company operated the landscaping business from February 14, 1995 to "D", and established the defendant company on March 9, 2004.

B. Since January 1, 2003, E was a Magjin branch manager of the Plaintiff Company on October 27, 2008.

C. From 2003 to 2008, E has dealt with C and Defendant Company’s tax affairs, and thereafter, as the manager of Plaintiff Company until December 2014, E has dealt with Defendant Company’s tax affairs.

E on September 27, 2016, transferred to the Plaintiff a claim against the Defendant Company for fee due to the foregoing tax processing, and notified the Defendant Company of the above transfer on September 27, 2016.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. C’s claim 1) The Plaintiff Company’s claim was processed with C’s tax affairs from 2003 to September 2005 from 2005, and the Plaintiff Company received payment of KRW 2,200,400 out of KRW 5,900,400 to KRW 3,700,40,000. However, upon incorporation of the Defendant Company, C comprehensively succeeded to the Defendant Company’s above fee obligation. Since E transferred the Plaintiff Company’s above fee obligation, the Defendant Company shall pay the Plaintiff Company the aforementioned fee amounting to KRW 370,400,00 and delay damages from the date of delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case.2) The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff Company alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant Company succeeded to the Defendant Company’s fee obligation of KRW 3,700,400, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise, this part of the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit.

B. 1 Plaintiff’s claim for fees due to the handling of the Defendant Company’s tax affairs from 2004 to 2008, EA, and from November 2008 to December 2014, 2014.

arrow