logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.11.24 2017나104987
사용료
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. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is a business operator who supplies electricity under the Electric Utility Act, and B is a person who operates D Council members in Chungcheongnam-gun Hong-gun, Hongsung-gun, and the defendant is the father of B.

B. The Plaintiff supplied electricity to the hospital in accordance with the electricity supply contract, such as the General Use (A) II and high voltageA between September 2016 and October 2016, but B did not pay the Plaintiff the total of KRW 4,436,710 in arrears interest rate of KRW 2,490,710 in September 2016, which occurred during the said period, and KRW 1,946,00 in October 2016.

C. On November 16, 2016, employees E visited the above hospital directly to the effect that it is difficult to supply electricity more electricity to the employees F of the above hospital due to the unpaid electricity charges, and urged to pay electricity charges.

On November 17, 2016, the Defendant visited Plaintiff Hongsung branch office, and drafted a letter of payment of overdue electricity charges (No. 1, hereinafter “instant letter”) at the request of E.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, each entry of Gap 1 through 3 (including additional numbers), testimony of Gap 1 to 3 (including additional numbers), the whole purport of pleading

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant made up a written statement of this case and paid B's overdue electricity charges, and agreed not to raise any objection to the claim for insurance proceeds and legal measures if not paid, and that the defendant is liable to pay the above overdue electricity charges to the plaintiff on the ground that this constitutes a kind of assumption of obligation.

B. The defendant's assertion that each of the instant contracts is a document promising B, a party to the electrical use contract, to pay delinquent electrical charges to the plaintiff up to a certain point, and the defendant merely prepares the instant letter on behalf of B, and does not directly agree to pay the above electrical charges.

3. The interpretation of the judgment shall be made by the parties to the act of indication.

arrow