(영문) 대구지방법원 2021.02.10 2020가단3632

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) 대구지방법원 2021.02.10 2020가단3632

물품대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Under the trade name of “C,” the Plaintiff is engaged in steel products wholesale and retail business, and the Defendant is engaged in the manufacturing business of automobile parts under the trade name of “D.”

[Grounds for recognition] Facts without dispute, purport of whole pleading

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion entered into a product supply contract with the Defendant on July 2019 to supply steel products for automobile parts, and from July 1, 2019 to the same year.

9. Until 18.18., the Defendant supplied the goods totaling KRW 64,178,872 to the Defendant. However, the Defendant paid only part of the goods price and did not pay the remainder of KRW 58,178,872.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the above price to the plaintiff.

B. The defendant's assertion that the defendant received goods from E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "E"), and E receives goods from the plaintiff. At the request of E, there is only a fact that the defendant paid part of the amount to the plaintiff by having the plaintiff pay the price for the goods to E within the scope of the price for the goods to be paid to E, and there is no fact that the goods are ordered to the plaintiff or directly traded with the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff's claim cannot be accepted.

(c)

Judgment

In light of the following circumstances, the evidence alone presented by the Plaintiff is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Plaintiff supplied the goods as alleged by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove it otherwise.

① Even according to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff did not directly deliver goods to the Defendant upon receipt of the Defendant’s order, and supplied them to E for the first processing.

However, there is no argument or proof by the plaintiff as to when and how E delivers the above goods to the defendant.

② A person who signed the specifications (Evidence A No. 2) submitted by the Plaintiff does not have any dispute over the fact that he/she is an employee of E, not the Defendant’s employee.

③ According to the evidence No. 7, the Plaintiff purchased an insurance policy with respect to sales claims against the Defendant.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원서부지원 2020.12.03 2020가단1473

-수원지방법원 2019.07.09 2018가단26884

-대전지방법원 2015.05.27 2014가합6309

-수원지방법원 여주지원 2018.10.02 2017가단7684

-서울남부지방법원 2017.10.17 2016가단35059