logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.10.13 2015가합66550
추심금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 1,266,687,425 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from August 4, 2015 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The fact that the Plaintiff re-supplys approximately KRW 7,40 tons of scrap scrap scrap, such as waste engines supplied by the Plaintiff, to the Defendant, and currently has a claim for the purchase price of goods in KRW 1,322,468,487 against the Defendant, is not disputed between the parties or can be recognized by taking full account of the respective descriptions in subparagraphs A (including a serial number) and B (3) and the purport of the entire pleadings.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to evidence Gap's evidence Nos. 5 and 6, in order for the plaintiff to receive KRW 1,266,687,425 to the non-party company by Seoul Central District Court 2015TTT 101931, the Seoul Central District Court rendered a provisional seizure of the claim KRW 1.1 billion by the provisional seizure order of claim No. 2014Kadan808934, July 3, 2015 based on the executory payment order of the case No. 2015 to obtain KRW 1,266,687,425 from the defendant, and the provisional seizure and collection order of the remaining KRW 166,687,425, among the claims such as the price of the goods to be paid by the non-party company from the defendant, and the above decision can be recognized to the defendant who is the debtor of July 3, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant collection order”). B.

Judgment

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant, who is the third debtor of the collection order of this case, is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the collection amount of KRW 1,266,67,425 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from August 4, 2015 to the date of full payment, as requested by the plaintiff, after delivering the collection order of this case to the defendant.

2. The defendant's argument as to the defendant's assertion is dismissed, such as the closed engine supplied by the non-party company.

arrow