beta
Text
1. The defendant
(a) USD 6,985,00, USD 54,525.10, and each of the above amounts shall be from May 31, 2018 to May 31, 2019.
Reasons
1. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. The facts under the recognition do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by adding up the whole purport of the pleadings to the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1-4.
1) The Plaintiff, a company selling petrochemicals, supplied the Defendant (China factory), in May 2018, with synthetic resin products equivalent to USD 54,525.10. On May 31, 2018, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with synthetic resin products equivalent to KRW 6,985,00. (2) The Plaintiff paid KRW 853,167 on behalf of the Defendant at the time of the supply of goods with respect to the above Chinese factory.
B. As the Plaintiff seeks, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of USD 54,525.10 of the price for goods, USD 6,985,00 of the price for goods, and each of the above amounts, calculated at the rate of 6% per annum as stipulated in the Commercial Act from May 31, 2018 to April 11, 2019, which is the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, and at the rate of 12% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day of the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case from April 12, 2019.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The content of the assertion in collusion with the Plaintiff’s staff C and the Defendant’s person in charge of the purchase approval D set the Plaintiff’s unit price for purchase, and in return, C granted money and valuables to D.
The Plaintiff acquired unjust enrichment exceeding KRW 1.3 billion from the Defendant from July 2008 to March 2018, and the Plaintiff’s claim for return of unjust enrichment and the Plaintiff’s claim for the price of goods are offset.
B. In full view of the evidence No. 1-5, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff obtained unjust enrichment by manipulating the unit price in supplying goods to the Defendant.
The defendant's defense that is based on this premise is.