logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2020.09.11 2019가합51024
매매대금
Text

The defendant's KRW 298,00,000 and its amount shall be 15% per annum from February 16, 2019 to May 31, 2019 to the plaintiff.

Reasons

Basic Facts

The plaintiff is a company that engages in the wholesale and retail business of oil, and the defendant is a company that engages in the wholesale and retail business of oil stations and the wholesale and retail business of lub oil.

From October 13, 2017 to September 19, 2018, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with oil equivalent to KRW 8,515,500,000.

From October 13, 2017 to October 31, 2018, the Defendant paid KRW 8,217,500,000 to the Plaintiff.

[Ground for recognition] The plaintiff's assertion of the purport of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings is that the plaintiff supplied oil to the defendant under the oil supply contract between the defendant and the defendant and was not paid KRW 298,00,000 ( = 8,515,50,500,000 - 8,217,500,000). Thus, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the oil price of KRW 298,00,000 and its delay damages.

The defendant's assertion cannot be deemed as the actual supplier of the oil supplied by the defendant. Even if the plaintiff is the supplier of the oil supplied by the plaintiff, the defendant's part of the oil supplied by the plaintiff is set excessively above the unit price and revoked the supply contract of this case on the ground of deception or mistake with respect to the oil supplied at a unit price exceeding the reasonable price. Thus, the defendant and the plaintiff agreed that the plaintiff should supply the oil equivalent to 10 won per liter of the oil supplied by the plaintiff free of charge. Since the defendant were supplied with the oil of 6,34,00 liters from the plaintiff, the amount of 63,340,000 won should be deducted from the free supply.

Judgment

The following circumstances acknowledged by adding up the respective descriptions in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and the purport of the entire pleadings in the determination as to the cause of the claim, namely, ① the Plaintiff entered into a contract with C on October 1, 2017 for a petroleum sales agency fee, but according to the said contract, the goods purchaser directly pays to the Plaintiff.

arrow