beta
Text
1. Defendant B: (a) 6% per annum from April 28, 2016 to January 24, 2018; and (b) January 25, 2018 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur who manufactures and sells posters, gas appliances, etc., and the Defendants are those who were co-representative directors of D (hereinafter “D”).
D operated the E branch (hereinafter referred to as the “instant restaurant”).
B. At the E point, the Plaintiff drafted a written contract (No. 1; hereinafter “instant contract”) that supplies Froster 44 and ancillary equipment to KRW 82,654,000 for the price of KRW 82,65,00.
Article 7 (3) of the contract of this case states that "If the person ordering is a corporation, the person representing the corporation or signing and sealing the contract of this case shall be jointly and severally responsible for the obligation and the obligation of the person who has not completed the payment of the price
On the other hand, the ordering person of the contract of this case is written as follows.
C GH I E
C. The Plaintiff’s total amount of goods for posters and ancillary equipment supplied to D was KRW 89,243,00,000. However, on August 14, 2015, J, an employee of the Plaintiff, presented the electronic transaction statement to K, who is an employee of D, as “amounting to 64,243,00 won,” and K signed the said electronic transaction statement.
The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D seeking the payment of the remainder of KRW 64,243,00 for the goods price and the delay damages therefor (U.S. District Court 2015da59142) and the judgment was rendered on March 11, 2016 that D paid the Plaintiff 64,243,00 won and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from September 1, 2015 to December 7, 2015, and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from December 8, 2015 to the day of full payment (Supreme Court 2016Na6085) and the dismissal of the final appeal (Supreme Court 2017Da916969).
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1, 6, 7, Eul's 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is the contract written between D and D. As D does not complete the payment of the price, the Defendants pursuant to Article 7(3) of the above contract.