beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and all pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff operated a mutually binding point in the name of "C" located in the Chungcheongnam-nam Budget Group, and the plaintiff did not receive the price of goods even after supplying construction materials to the defendant, and the defendant prepared a payment note containing that the plaintiff would pay 38.2 million won to the plaintiff by August 15, 2013. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from March 15, 2017 to the day of full payment, as requested by the plaintiff, as the payment deadline is 9.2 million won for the unpaid goods and the plaintiff's claim against the plaintiff.
2. The defendant's defense is defense that the above claim for the price of goods has expired by prescription.
On the other hand, the above claim for the price of goods falls under “the price for products and goods sold by producers and merchants” under Article 163 subparag. 6 of the Civil Act and thus, the short-term extinctive prescription of three years applies. As seen earlier, the fact that the due date for payment of the above claim for the price of goods was August 15, 2013 is apparent in the record that the lawsuit of this case was filed on February 24, 2017 when three years have passed thereafter, barring any special circumstance, the plaintiff’s claim for the price of goods was expired.
In regard to this, the Plaintiff re-arguing that the extinctive prescription of the above claim was interrupted because it was re-arguable by the Defendant prior to the expiration of the extinctive prescription period of the above claim, and thus, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the entries and arguments in the evidence Nos. 2 and 3 (including the provisional number), the Plaintiff transferred KRW 20 million from the Defendant on September 5, 2014 to the Plaintiff’s account in the name of D working at the said iron shop, and on February 3, 2017, KRW 80,000 from Taesan Construction Co., Ltd., the Defendant’s debtor, instead of the Defendant.