(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.16 2014나31546

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.16 2014나31546

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 plaintiff alleged that C had no transaction with the plaintiff, requested the defendant who had no transaction with the plaintiff to supply the drug to C, and the drug was delivered to C by changing the delivery place. The plaintiff supplied the drug to C by either receiving the drug price from the defendant or having the plaintiff visit the defendant to receive the drug. The defendant did not pay KRW 3,500,035 of the drug price supplied to the defendant. Thus, the plaintiff sought payment against the defendant.

2. The fact that there is no dispute over the determination, comprehensively taking account of the entries in Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the plaintiff, a corporation that is engaged in the manufacture and sale of drugs, etc., is deemed to have supplied 500,035 won (hereinafter "the supply of the goods in this case") to the "E" located in Ansan-gu, operated as its representative (CC) on September 1, 201, 50 U. 1 V. 1 V. 500,035 won (hereinafter "the supply of the goods in this case"), but it is insufficient to acknowledge the payment obligation of the goods in this case to the plaintiff only by the entries in Gap evidence No. 2 through 4, and there is no other evidence.

Rather, according to each of the above evidence, the Plaintiff was engaged in drug supply transaction from around July 201 with C operating a “B member” from the Seo-gu, Seoan-gu, Seocheon-gu, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice with the opposite contractual party C as of August 31, 201 regarding the instant goods supply. The Plaintiff entered the instant goods supply card with C in the transaction card with C, and only recognized the fact that C was sealed with the purport of confirming it.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, the defendant's appeal is accepted and the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2015.02.06 2014나1049

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.12 2014나56675

-서울고등법원 2020.01.09 2019누49221

-서울고등법원 2013.03.21 2012나77473

-서울북부지방법원 2014.01.21 2013가단6466