logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원서부지원 2017.11.15 2016가단63771
공사대금
Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 40,420,000 won and the interest rate of 15% per annum from April 23, 2017 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a legal entity that performs the installation work of air conditioners and wholesale and retail business, and the Defendants are personal entrepreneurs engaged in the same type of business as the Plaintiff, and Defendant B has lent the name and trade name of Defendant A who registered his/her business under the trade name of “C” during which the business is not registered under his/her own name.

B. On April 13, 2015, at the end of consultation with Defendant B, the Plaintiff supplied (including installation) the Plaintiff’s heating and cooling machine to 4,7520,000 won (including installation) at the end of consultation with Defendant B. On the same day, Defendant B, a business operator of “C”, drafted a contract for supplying equipment under the name of Defendant A, which is the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). C.

After completing the supply of air conditioners under the instant contract, on June 30, 2015, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of 4,7520,000 won for the supply price to Defendant A, with the Plaintiff supplied. On January 30, 2016, the Plaintiff drafted a tax invoice for the payment of the total amount of KRW 60,226,00,00 including the supply price of the said goods from Defendant B, as the price is not paid.

However, the Defendants did not pay the price for supply under the instant contract to the Plaintiff until now.

[Reasons for Recognition] Defendant A: The non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence No. 1 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings, defendant B: Each entry of evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to view that Defendant A lent the name and trade name of Defendant A to Defendant B and the instant contract was concluded with the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff recognized the Defendant A as the business owner at the time of conclusion and delivery of the said contract, barring any special circumstance, Defendant A, the nominal name of which was jointly and severally with Defendant B, as the price of supply under the instant contract, is 47520,000 won.

arrow