본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.08.23 2017가단538946

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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


1. Basic facts

A. On February 28, 2014, the Plaintiff, who sells oil in the name of “C”, issued an electronic tax invoice of KRW 33 million (including value-added tax and light oil) to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”).

B. On September 11, 2014, the Plaintiff sent to D a certificate of content that “the Plaintiff paid 33 million won of the oil supplied by February 2014, by September 17, 2014.”

C. On September 29, 2014, D entered into a construction machinery lease agreement with the Defendant, and carried out the work at the construction site executed by the Defendant from October 4, 2013 to May 22, 2014. Oil was supplied by the Defendant.

Accordingly, all oil payments that occurred during the work period was claimed in the defendant's future.

Therefore, we are not obliged to pay the oil price to the plaintiff.

“The content certification was sent.”

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Selective claim - The Defendant, who was supplied oil from the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion, provided that the amount of KRW 30 million out of KRW 98 million for February 2014, would be paid by D, and the said amount would be claimed by D.

The plaintiff, who believed the defendant's oral statement, filed a claim for the above amount with D when issuing an electronic tax invoice on the above 33 million won, but D refused to pay it with no obligation to pay it.

The Defendant’s obligation to pay oil to the Plaintiff, even though he was obligated to pay oil to the Plaintiff, is hidden and not required to issue a transaction statement or tax invoice, etc. to the Defendant, thereby making the Plaintiff trusting such obligation not to issue a transaction statement or tax invoice, etc. to the Defendant as the other party, constitutes a tort, and thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the said KRW 33 million.

(2) The above assertion regarding the Plaintiff’s oil supply situation, etc. is true.