logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.10.25 2018나68993
물품대금
Text

Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person who engages in wholesale and retail business of bank supplies, household goods, etc. with the trade name of “C”, and the Defendant is a person who manufactures and sells bank supplies, etc. with the trade name of “D.”

B. From July 17, 2014 to April 11, 2018, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with guard and other supplies.

The Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of the total amount of KRW 569,545,90 in 2014, KRW 190,073,840 in 2015, KRW 150,238,00 in 2016, KRW 159,59,000 in 2017, KRW 9,367,380 in total, KRW 569,545,90 in 2017, and filed a value-added tax return.

The defendant also reported purchase of value-added tax to each of the above amounts.

C. The Plaintiff received the total amount of KRW 407,709,760 from the Defendant during the said period.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 39 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers), Eul evidence 2 through 68, and 70 through 81, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. From July 17, 2014 to April 11, 2018, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with a total of KRW 569,545,90,00, and only paid KRW 407,709,760 from the Defendant. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the price for the goods unpaid ( KRW 569,545,900 - 407,709,760) and damages for delay.

B. The defendant's assertion is that the defendant supplied the plaintiff with a total of KRW 375,251,035,00 from the plaintiff during the above transaction period and paid the price in full to the plaintiff. Thus, the amount of the goods unpaid in relation to the above transaction remains not remaining.

3. Determination

A. According to the reasoning of the judgment on the cause of the claim 1, the Plaintiff reported the sales of value-added tax by providing the Defendant with a total of KRW 569,545,90 from 2014 to 2018, and the Defendant also purchased the same amount of money from the Plaintiff during the same period.

arrow