beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 32,365,410 as well as 15% per annum from December 13, 2018 to May 31, 2019 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff agreed to supply ready-mixed manufactured by the Plaintiff between the Defendant and pay the price in cash 60 days after the issuance of the monthly tax invoice.
B. From June 1, 2018 to June 22, 2018, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with a total of KRW 32,365,410 (including value-added tax) in total as stated in the separate sheet as stated in the attached sheet. On June 30, 2018, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice stating the amount to the Defendant on June 30, 2018.
【Fact-finding without dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap 1, 2, 3 (including more than one number), the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 32,365,410 won with the supply price of ready-mixed and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from December 13, 2018 to the next day of the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the plaintiff after the due date, and from May 21, 2019 as amended by Presidential Decree No. 29768, the "Provisions on statutory interest rate under the main sentence of Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc.," and Articles 1 and 2 (2) of the Addenda thereof, and the late payment damages calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.
(Inasmuch as the provision on statutory interest rate under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings was amended on May 21, 2019 and enforced on June 1, 2019, damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from June 1, 2019 to the date of full payment, it is recognized only as damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum. Therefore, the part in excess of the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit). Although the Defendant asserted that he/she claimed that he/she paid a reasonable amount to the Plaintiff, disputing the amount of the Plaintiff’s supply and the amount of the payment,
3. According to the conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit.