beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the instant principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be the principal lawsuit.
Reasons
The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, and the part concerning the defendant's assertion on the credibility of evidence as stated in Chapters 7, 5, and 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and the part concerning this case is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance except where the "the date of the judgment of the court of first instance" of the court of first instance is "the date of the judgment of the court of first instance" of the court of first instance. The defendant asserts that the part concerning this case is written by the court of first instance pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the sales ledger (Evidence 5-1), customer's director (Evidence 5-2 of the evidence No. 5-2 of the judgment of the court of first instance) submitted by the plaintiff is written by the plaintiff, and it is not possible
However, in light of the following circumstances, each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 5 through 11, 20, and 21 (including each number), which can be acknowledged in full view of the whole purport of the pleadings, the above sales account book and the director of the Customer Director may sufficiently reliable, and the circumstance alleged by the defendant alone is difficult to view otherwise.
① In filing the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff asserted that the total amount of the price for goods supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant on the basis of the list of total invoices by purchase source (i.e., KRW 105,688,880 (=65,000,000 in 201) was KRW 40,688,000 in 201).
However, the Plaintiff asserted that the total amount of the goods supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant was KRW 203,387,100, and extended the purport of the claim.
② The above sales account book was drawn up during the period from January 17, 201 to October 6, 2011. The head of the said transaction partner’s office was set up by a computer program during the period from October 1, 201 to March 1, 2013. The item (30 items, order quantity, sales amount, and purchase amount of goods supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant during the said transaction period are written in detail by the date.
(3) This shall be applicable.