(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.06.27 2017나9077 | 리걸엔진

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) 인천지방법원 2018.06.27 2017나9077

물품대금

Text

1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part is revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff engaged in the printing business with the trade name called C, and the Defendant runs the wholesale and retail business with the trade name called D.

B. On April 30, 2016, the Plaintiff issued an electronic tax invoice of KRW 7,090,90,909, and tax amount of KRW 709,09,090 as the recipient of the Defendant.

C. The Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 3.3 million on March 21, 2016, and KRW 3 million on May 3, 2016.

[Ground] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, Eul evidence 2-1 and Eul evidence 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On April 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with a packaging paper equivalent to KRW 7,799,999. The Defendant paid KRW 1,729,469 to the Plaintiff only, and did not pay the remainder of the goods.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the remaining goods price and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

(Plaintiff filed a claim for KRW 1,980,00 for the amount of goods supplied on October 2016, but the first instance court rendered a judgment dismissing this part of the claim, and the Plaintiff did not appeal this part of the claim, which was excluded from the subject of the judgment of this court). (B)

Since the parties who traded with the plaintiff are the husband of the defendant who is not the defendant, it is unreasonable to claim the price of goods to the defendant.

Even if the defendant is the party to the contract, the price of goods against the plaintiff was fully paid.

3. Determination

A. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff is a party to the contract, but as long as the business registration of D is registered in the name of the defendant, the defendant shall be deemed the party to the contract as to the contractual relationship arising in the course of the business unless there are special circumstances. Therefore, the defendant's allegation in this part is rejected

B. However, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the claims equivalent to the amount claimed by the Plaintiff remain at present, as to the existence of the claim for the price of goods.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.07.13 2017가단222374

-서울남부지방법원 2019.01.17 2018나51964

-서울남부지방법원 2020.07.10 2019나57877

-청주지방법원 2017.10.19 2016가단101334

-인천지방법원 2020.10.14 2019나5611