logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.01.11 2017나56016
물품대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. On August 10, 2014, the Plaintiff running the manufacturing and wholesale business of the Plaintiff’s alleged automobile maintenance machinery and appliances, etc.: (a) around August 10, 2014, the Plaintiff, a place of business of Gangwon-gun B, agreed to sell equipment necessary for a Class I automobile comprehensive repair business establishment at KRW 6,688,00; and (b) supplied all equipment to the Defendant; (c) the Defendant did not pay KRW 19,420,000 out of the purchase price; and (d) thus, the Defendant is obligated

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff concluded a sales contract for equipment necessary for a Class I maintenance business establishment with the Defendant and supplied all equipment to the Defendant, and the fact that the Defendant did not pay KRW 19,420,000 out of the purchase price does not conflict between the parties.

B. However, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a sales contract for equipment necessary for a Class 1 maintenance business establishment on August 10, 2014, and concluded a sales contract again on August 18, 2014 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). The Defendant purchased a site adjacent to the place of business to meet the requirements for facilities of Class 1 maintenance business establishment and extended the length of existing buildings with four meters long after the purchase of the site adjacent to the place of business to increase the length of the building by nine meters, and accordingly, the procedure for authorization and permission of the class 1 maintenance business establishment was not in progress without dispute between the parties, or according to the video and the statement in the evidence No. 4, No. 7, No. 1, No. 4, and No. 4, each video and the statement in the evidence No.

C. As to this, the Plaintiff is authorized to complete the construction work almost close to the construction in the process of extending the existing building.

arrow