(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.07.11 2018나10866

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) 수원지방법원 2019.07.11 2018나10866

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

[Claim]

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From August 2017, the Defendant is registered as the representative of the business entity of Pyeongtaek-si building and the restaurant in the first floor.

B. The Plaintiff received a request from the employees of the above D stores for the supply of food materials, etc., and supplied food materials (hereinafter “the instant goods”) to the D stores from August 2017 to March 2018, and supplied them (hereinafter “the Plaintiff”) such as the bones of nives of pigs, swine Typ, etc. to the D stores, and received them, and issued a trade list stating the Defendant’s business registration number, name, trade name, etc., and subsequently supplied the goods amounting to KRW 814,928 around March 16, 2018, the Plaintiff issued a trade list with the Defendant’s trade name, etc., and signed thereon by issuing a trade list for KRW 8,296,915 in total, including the outstanding amount of KRW 7,481,987 until then. However, the Plaintiff did not receive the said amount until then.

C. Meanwhile, the above D points closed on April 4, 2018, and the Defendant filed an application for immunity with the Suwon District Court No. 2018Hadan1948, 2018, 1948, around July of the same year, and the Plaintiff is specified in the list of creditors.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of a claim: In a case where an actor who enters into a contract performs a juristic act in the name of another person, who is the party to the contract or who is the nominal person; in a case where the intent of the actor and the other party coincide with each other, the actor or the nominal person shall be decided as the party to the contract according to the consent of the other party; in a case where the intent of the actor and the other party coincide with each other, if the other party fail to coincide with each other, the other party shall be decided by how to understand either the actor or nominal person as the party to the contract, based on the specific circumstances before

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da22089, Mar. 13, 1998).

참조판례

-대법원 1998. 3. 13. 선고 97다22089 판결

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2015.08.11 2014가단56673

-서울북부지방법원 2018.01.25 2017가단119438

-제주지방법원 2015.03.25 2014나1225

-청주지방법원 2016.03.16 2015가단14518

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.20 2014가합43415