logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.07.02 2015나555
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

1..

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On the mutual basis of “B”, the Plaintiff engaged in the manufacturing business of provisional public machinery supplies the Defendant, who is engaged in the manufacturing business of concrete products from October 29, 2010 to January 4, 2012, with a gold block set at KRW 91,62,00 from the Defendant, and did not receive the price for goods equivalent to KRW 91,62,00 from the Defendant.

B. Thereafter, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 85,00,000,000 in total, as the price for goods, on January 20, 2012, and KRW 10,000 on June 5, 2012, and KRW 10,000,000 on July 5, 2012, and KRW 5,000,000 on February 6, 2013.

【In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 3, 4-1 to 8, 5-1, and 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the price of KRW 6,662,00 ( KRW 91,62,00-85,00,000) and the delay damages, unless there are special circumstances.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. On July 5, 2012, the Defendant asserted that, while settling accounts with the Plaintiff for the prices of the goods, the Defendant agreed to reduce the price of KRW 4,730,000 for the gold-type 1 set (12-6T; hereinafter “the gold-type”) returned due to the defect in the gold-type 5 set supplied by the Plaintiff on September 30, 201, and KRW 1,932,00 for the remainder of the goods, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be accepted.

B. In the following circumstances, the Plaintiff currently keeps the gold paper of this case, namely, the fact that there is no dispute between the parties to the judgment, or that the Plaintiff remains using the gold paper of this case with the gold paper of this case without any particular problem, and the Plaintiff merely keeps the gold paper of this case at the request of the Defendant. However, it is very exceptional that the Plaintiff keeps the gold paper of this case after receiving a return of the goods already supplied without setting the period of storage, storage fees, etc. in the absence of payment by the supplier of the goods.

arrow