logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2015.05.22 2014가단23423
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. The Plaintiff had a transactional relationship where the Defendant supplied goods, such as salt rates, to the Plaintiff Company B whose representative director is the Plaintiff and received the payment.

B. On July 28, 2014, Company B filed an application for rehabilitation with the District Court 2014 Ma504 decided July 28, 2014. In the rehabilitation procedure commenced accordingly, Company B reported KRW 102,617,750 of the unpaid amount of goods to the Plaintiff as rehabilitation claims.

C. In the above rehabilitation case, on November 18, 2014, the rehabilitation was revoked, and the company B filed a petition for bankruptcy with the District Court Decision 2015Hahap1002, which was declared bankrupt on March 31, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 8, Eul evidence 1 through 5, Eul evidence 8 and Eul evidence 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was to supply goods to the Defendant’s individual, separate from that of the Defendant Company B, whose representative director is the Plaintiff.

The Defendant asserts that the unpaid amount of KRW 102,617,750 is all the obligations of Company B. However, among them, the unpaid amount of KRW 47,643,750 (as of May 13, 2014, the closing transaction date) is 54,974,000 (the unpaid amount of goods as of October 19, 201, the closing transaction date) and separately, the Defendant is obliged to pay KRW 54,974,000 for the unpaid amount of goods.

B. The following circumstances are as follows: ① the Plaintiff only issued a tax invoice to the Defendant, but did not issue a tax invoice to the Plaintiff, ② the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff did not issue a tax invoice instead of paying goods in cash. The Plaintiff also engaged in non-material transactions, which are acknowledged by the overall purport of each entry and pleading in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul's evidence Nos. 2 through 5, and Eul's evidence Nos. 7 through 10 (including each serial number).

arrow