(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.11.22 2018나51260

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.11.22 2018나51260

물품대금

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. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation as to the instant case is as follows, except for the Defendant’s additional determination as to the part claimed in the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination on the additional argument

A. The Defendant asserts that C, a contractor, repaid 26,00,000 won to the Plaintiff around October 2015, and H, upon paying the Plaintiff a part of the price of ready-mixed, rescinded a provisional disposition on two parcels of real estate among seven parcels of real estate on which a provisional disposition prohibiting real estate disposal was issued on March 22, 2018. Thus, the Defendant asserts that C and H’s repayment made payment to the Plaintiff and the amount of ready-mixed that the Defendant would have paid to the Plaintiff was fully repaid.

B. First of all, according to the purport of the written evidence No. 3 and the entire pleadings as to the assertion that C repaid, it is recognized that the amount of KRW 52,00,000,000, which the Plaintiff sought as the claim of this case, is 26,000,000, which was paid by C on October 26, 2015. Thus, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

Next, according to the overall purport of the statements and arguments in the Health Team, Gap evidence Nos. 10 and Eul evidence Nos. 9 as to the assertion that H performed the obligation, the plaintiff was paid KRW 62,806,286 to H operating the Fund as well as the ready-mixed price according to the order of this case on April 21, 2017, and received KRW 30,000,000 as payment for the above goods supplied from H on March 22, 2018. This cannot be viewed as payment for the ready-mixed price pursuant to the order of this case.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2017.08.22 2016가단230618

-대구지방법원 2017.11.29 2017가단21210

-대전지방법원 홍성지원 2016.06.14 2015고단842

-의정부지방법원 2015.11.05 2014가단110167

-창원지방법원 2019.12.13 2018나3988