beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a person who runs a wholesale and retail business with the trade name of “C”, and the Defendant is a person who runs a textbook retail business, etc. with the trade name of “D.”
B. From March 30, 2006 to July 29, 2010, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with books, etc. equivalent to KRW 1,028,142,946 in total, and the Defendant paid KRW 800,783,325 in total to the Plaintiff from March 30, 2006 to December 16, 2010.
C. On December 4, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for the instant payment order seeking payment of the unpaid amount of KRW 227,359,621 (i.e., KRW 1,028,142,946 - 800,783,325) against the Defendant.
【Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including a branch number; hereinafter the same shall apply)
(2) Each entry and the purport of the whole pleading
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the price of the goods at KRW 227,359,621 as the price for the goods, and the delay damages therefor, unless there are special circumstances.
B. The Defendant’s assertion (1) The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s claim for the price of goods is subject to the three-year extinctive prescription pursuant to Article 163 subparag. 6 of the Civil Act. The Plaintiff filed an application for the instant payment order with the Defendant to seek the price of goods on December 4, 2018, near the eight-year period from December 16, 2010 to December 4, 2018, the Plaintiff’s claim for the price of goods has expired.
(2) In light of the above facts, the Plaintiff’s claim for the price of goods against the Defendant constitutes a merchant as a “price for goods sold by a merchant,” and the three-year short-term extinctive prescription is applied pursuant to Article 163 subparag. 6 of the Civil Act. The starting point of calculation is a claim arising from a continuous transactional relationship and the credit arising from a continuous transactional relationship is individually conducted from the time each credit payment claim occurred (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 77Da2463, Mar. 28, 1978).