logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 2016.06.10 2015나11297
양수금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are all borne by the Defendant, including those resulting from the supplementary participation.

Reasons

1. Facts recognized;

A. On February 5, 2014, the Plaintiff received from the Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s claim for KRW 172,690,415 out of the amount of goods-price claim against the Defendant (the sales claim accrued on October 8, 2013 through December 19, 2013) against the Intervenor.

(2) On February 6, 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the instant first assignment by content-certified mail on behalf of the Intervenor, and the Defendant received the content-certified mail on February 7, 2014.

B. On February 6, 2014, the Intervenor transferred the claim amounting to KRW 52,935,000 among the claim for the price of goods against the Defendant (the claim arising from the sales accrued around March through January 2014) to the Green Construction Co., Ltd.

(hereinafter “Assignment 2”). On the same day, the assistant intervenor notified the Defendant of the assignment of the instant claim No. 2 by content-certified mail, and the Defendant received this content-certified mail around that time.

다. 원고는 이 사건 소송이 제1심에 계속 중이던 2014. 11. 28. 보조참가인으로부터 보조참가인의 피고에 대한 물품대금채권(2013년 10월경∽12월경 발생한 매출을 포함하여 위 기간을 전후하여 발생한 매출에 따른 물품대금채권) 중 172,690,415원의 채권을 다시 양도받았다

(hereinafter “The assignment of the third claim”). On November 28, 2014, the assistant intervenor notified the Defendant of the assignment of the third claim by content-certified mail, and the Defendant received the content-certified mail on December 1, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry and the purport of the whole pleadings of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 31, 126, 129, 132 (hereinafter referred to as "written evidence with several numbers")

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The summary of the party’s assertion (1) The supplementary intervenor of the Plaintiff and the supplementary intervenor did not receive the price of KRW 403,51,289 from the Defendant on the basis of “ December 31, 2013.”

However, the supplementary intervenor on February 5, 2014.

arrow