(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.01.08 2013나29391

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) 수원지방법원 2016.01.08 2013나29391

물품대금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff is a corporation that runs the wholesale and retail business of stone, and runs the wholesale and retail business of construction materials with the trade name “B” from July 2007 to August 2007, and from May 2008 to November 2009, C (hereinafter “C”).

The Defendant supplied substitute stones to the Defendant who used the business by borrowing the name of the Defendant, and the Defendant sought payment of KRW 1,072,138 out of the price of the goods. 2) The Defendant’s assertion that the price of the goods that the Plaintiff supplied from July 2007 to August 2007 was completed settlement, and even if the price of the goods was unpaid, the said price of goods was terminated by the short-term extinctive prescription of three years, and the price of goods that the Plaintiff supplied from May 2008 to November 2009 was caused by transactions between C, not by the Defendant, but by transactions between C, and thus, the payer is deemed C, and the Defendant cannot comply with the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that there was no obligation to pay.

B. 1) First of all, we examine the part of the price of the goods the Plaintiff seeks from July 2007 to August 20 of the same year, which corresponds to the period from July 2007 to the date of August of the same year. The evidence Nos. 1 and 3 (which include a serial number, hereinafter the same applies)

In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff’s 2,612,610 won on July 19, 2007 operated by the Defendant, and the same year.

7. 24.3,800,400 won, and the same year;

8. 17.926,820 won, the same year;

8. Although it is recognized that the stone equivalent to the aggregate of KRW 12,477,35,400 is supplied, it is part of the unpaid amount of goods as alleged by the Plaintiff.

Even if the above claim for the price of goods is applied to the short-term extinctive prescription of three years for the products sold by merchants and for the price of the goods, and there is no proof as to the payment date for the price of goods.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2016.09.23 2015나4261

-의정부지방법원 2020.08.25 2019나4398

-대구지방법원 2020.12.11 2020가단6181

-인천지방법원 2015.12.16 2015나14662

-광주지방법원순천지원 2020.07.08 2020가단98