logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.02.12 2014나6334
물품대금
Text

1. In the judgment of the first instance, the part against Defendant B in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) was awarded a contract with Defendant B for the new construction of the housing located in Yongcheon-si E (hereinafter “instant construction”) in the amount of KRW 84.5 million on June 14, 2012.

B. The Plaintiff, a company engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling the sand panel, supplied the building materials such as the board, etc. to be used for the instant construction to D, but did not receive KRW 11,214,00 for the relevant goods.

C. On September 4, 2012, C, the actual operator of D, prepared a letter of payment (Evidence A 3; hereinafter “instant letter of payment”) with the intent to pay KRW 11.214.00 on its own as the debtor by 2012, and deliver it to the Plaintiff. Defendant A, the husband of Defendant B, at the time, guaranteed C’s obligation under the instant letter of payment.

D On September 18, 2012, Defendant B transferred KRW 11,214,00 to the Plaintiff out of the remainder of the construction cost of this case (excluding advance payment 20% and intermediate payment 50%) against Defendant B, and notified Defendant B of the fact of transfer on September 20, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 1, 3, 4 evidence, witness C's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the above recognition of the claim against Defendant A, Defendant A is jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 11,214,00,00, jointly and severally with the principal debtor C, as a joint and several surety for the obligation based on the instant payment memorandum, and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from October 16, 2013 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the last day of the copy of the instant complaint sought by the Plaintiff after the due date.

As to this, Defendant A, on the basis of a separate statement of payment (No. 3) in which the debtor column of the contract date and the upper group is vacant, and the instant statement of payment was a complete document, so the joint and several guarantee contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was not concluded, and through C.

arrow