beta
Text
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 54,465,725 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from January 28, 2014 to February 11, 2014.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. By October 29, 2013, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with salt in direct color, and did not receive KRW 58,714,445 of the salt price. On the same day, the Defendant prepared and issued a written confirmation confirming that the Plaintiff had a debt equivalent to the above amount.
B. After that, the Plaintiff additionally supplied each salt fee equivalent to KRW 508,750 on January 6, 2014, KRW 203,50 on January 2014, and KRW 712,250 on a total of KRW 712,00,00 to the Defendant. The unpaid salt price around that time remains 54,465,725.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts found in the judgment on the claim of this case, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 54,465,725 won and 5% per annum prescribed by the Civil Act from January 28, 2014 to February 11, 2014, the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case, as sought by the Plaintiff, and 20% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.
3. As to the counterclaim claim, the Defendant asserted that the RoUBIN 2GFL (RED 167) among the salt charges supplied by the Plaintiff, the distributed agents that play the role of distributing and infiltrating the salt rates inside the original base were fluored, and thus, the fluoral pits were not scattered and distributed as a result, and the fluoral fluorals were transferred to the original surface, and the Plaintiff fell from the surface and caused LOT car (fluor), yellows, yellows, and urine pollution, etc. were generated, and the Plaintiff imported from several companies and supplied them to the Defendant without receiving salt charges from the same manufacturer, thereby causing LOT car. Accordingly, the Defendant suffered damages equivalent to KRW 37,391,379 due to such inferior salt, and the Plaintiff is liable to pay the Defendant the amount of damages and damages for delay equivalent to the above amount.
Therefore, the defendant's argument is the LOT car, the lux, and the lux.