(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.11.22 2017가단21647

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) 대전지방법원 2018.11.22 2017가단21647

물품대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 5, 2013, the Defendant entered into a construction subcontract to subcontract the part of the tin work among the construction works for the construction works for the construction works of the Hanan-dong Hanan Officetel with the size of 427-373 et al. located in the Haan-dong 427-373 et al. (hereinafter referred to as “pathical stone”) with the amount of KRW 220 million.

B. By April 2014, the Plaintiff supplied and executed the stone equivalent to KRW 37,820,618 (including value-added tax) on the flat stone. Around that time, the Plaintiff consented to direct payment of the stone.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that around August 1, 2014, the Defendant prepared a payment confirmation letter stating that “20,000,000 won based on the direct and unpaid consent of the stone shall be paid in September 30, 2014,” and KRW 17,820,618 shall be paid in September 30, 2014,” and the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 37,820,618 and delay damages.

B. The plaintiff sought payment of the above money to the defendant on the ground of the evidence No. 4 (A's copy of the written confirmation). The defendant denies the preparation of the evidence No. 4 (the defendant's assertion that the document No. 4 is not the defendant). The evidence and the testimony of the witness A submitted by the plaintiff alone are insufficient to recognize the existence of the original evidence No. 4 and its authenticity, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, evidence No. 4 cannot be used as evidence to support the payment agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant, and other evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the above assertion by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원성남지원 2017.10.18 2016가단221886

-서울동부지방법원 2017.12.15 2016가단117873

-청주지방법원 2020.06.24 2020가단1790

-창원지방법원 2016.08.24 2015나4836

-광주지방법원 2017.01.10 2015가단41041