logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.11.06 2018나77359
물품대금
Text

1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part is revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 29, 2014, C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) ordered 3,000 Lunununununununununll 3,00 and 3,000 goods to be manufactured and supplied by the Plaintiff instead of the Defendant’s direct production.

B. Accordingly, on October 29, 2014, C paid KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff, not the Defendant, as a part of the purchase price for the Lununununununununa, and on October 31, 2014, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice stating that the Plaintiff supplied the instant goods worth KRW 94,578,000 with C as “the recipient” on October 31, 2014.

C. From around that time to November 2014, the Plaintiff supplied C with the goods equivalent to KRW 94,578,000 (including the volume of additional orders) including 3,00 Lununununununll and 12,00 (including the volume of additional orders).

B. The Plaintiff

C. On June 29, 2015, the payment note stating that “C shall pay 84,578,000 won for the goods unpaid to the Plaintiff in installments from October 31, 2015, and shall not raise an objection to the Plaintiff’s legal measures if it is not implemented” (hereinafter “instant payment note”) was written and delivered to the Plaintiff.

E. On June 21, 2016, the Plaintiff urged C to pay the remainder of the instant goods.

F. The Plaintiff filed a criminal charge against the Defendant and C’s representative G, but on October 18, 2017, the Defendant was rendered a non-suspected decision and was prosecuted only for G fraud. G was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for July 18, 2019 with the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2017Ra2943 on July 18, 2019, and was sentenced to a judgment of conviction for two years of suspended execution (which is still pending in the appellate trial), and the reasons for the sentencing of the said judgment are stated that G was fully agreed with the Plaintiff, the victim.

[Ground of Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 5 through 8 (including paper numbers, Eul evidence 7 to 9, Eul 1, 2 respectively.

arrow