beta
Text
1. The claim of this case is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
Plaintiff’s assertion
From February 12, 2010 to November 16, 2015, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with goods, such as cooperation devices and equipment, and materials. As of November 16, 2015, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff KRW 22,134,146 out of the purchase price of goods in 2010, KRW 64,525 out of the purchase price of goods in 2011, KRW 10,903,839 out of the purchase price of goods in 2012, KRW 1,045,100 out of the purchase price of goods in 2013, + KRW 1,020,435 won out of the purchase price of goods in 2014, + KRW 41,762,870 won out of the purchase price of goods in 2015 + KRW 22,134,146,54,539,505 won out of the purchase price of goods in 2014,50
Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff 41,762,870 won for the unpaid goods and delay damages.
Judgment
A. As alleged by the Plaintiff, each of the evidence No. 9 (including a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) is indicated as evidence that seems consistent with the fact that the claim for the purchase-price against the Defendant was created.
However, it is difficult to believe that each of the above evidence is merely a list of total outstanding amounts prepared by the Plaintiff at will or a record that is difficult to grasp the content thereof.
B. Furthermore, although the Plaintiff did not disclose the grounds for calculating the amount of the amount of the unpaid goods despite the name of this court, at the 6th date for pleading, the Plaintiff asserted the amount of the unpaid goods that is different from the previous assertion while submitting the evidence No. 9, etc., the transaction account book submitted by the Plaintiff (Evidence No. 2-1, No. 2-2) does not indicate that the unpaid goods amount exists for the period from 2010 to 2012, and for the year 2014, it is stated that the Defendant paid the amount higher than the amount of the goods that the Defendant has to pay to the Plaintiff for the year 2014, and the Plaintiff did not submit a written contract or a tax invoice with the Defendant for the transaction of goods with the Defendant. In light of the above, the entries in the evidence No. 1, No.