(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.11.19 2019가단330641

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) 부산지방법원 2019.11.19 2019가단330641

물품대금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 72,965,604 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 6% per annum from December 1, 2018 to June 23, 2019, and the following.

Reasons

1. There is no dispute between the parties to the facts of recognition, or according to the entries in Gap evidence 1 to 4, the following facts may be recognized and there is no evidence that obstructs them:

The Plaintiff is a company engaged in steel products wholesale and retail business, and C is a company engaged in steel products wholesale and retail business, and the Defendant is registered as the auditor of the non-party company.

B. On August 18, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) supplied steel materials to the non-party company; and (b) concluded a goods supply contract with the non-party company to receive interest at a rate of 6% per annum from the non-party company by the end of the following month; and (c) the Defendant guaranteed the non-party company to jointly pay the price for the goods to the plaintiff.

C. After entering into the instant goods supply contract, the Plaintiff supplied steel to Nonparty Company by October 31, 2018, but did not receive KRW 72,965,604 out of the price of the goods supplied.

2. According to the above facts of determination, the defendant, as a joint guarantor of the non-party company's debt for the payment of goods to the plaintiff, is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 72,965,604 won for the goods unpaid to the plaintiff and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum per annum under the agreement interest rate from December 1, 2018 to June 23, 2019, which is obvious from the date following the end of the next month of the final supply date ( October 31, 2018) which is the due date for the payment of the payment order in this case, to the date of delivery of the original copy of the payment order in this case to the defendant.

The defendant's assertion that there is no sufficient means to repay this, is rejected as it is not a legal ground for preventing or rejecting the plaintiff's claim.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2019.05.29 2018가합1540

-수원지방법원여주지원 2015.01.14 2013가단9545

-서울남부지방법원 2020.02.06 2019고합229

-수원지방법원평택지원 2019.04.18 2018가합604

-수원지방법원 2015.07.15 2014가단69135