(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.12.24 2019나60711

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) 창원지방법원 2020.12.24 2019나60711

용역대금 등

Text

Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the order to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's claim

A. On February 27, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a specialized consignment processing contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant service contract”) and supplied the service under the said contract to the Defendant from around that time. The price for the service supplied to the Defendant from October 27, 2016 to February 28, 2017 is as specified in the following tax invoice issuance list (hereinafter “tax invoice issuance list”).

The Defendant’s total service cost to be paid to the Plaintiff is KRW 178,200,827. Since the Defendant paid KRW 58,000,000 among them, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of KRW 120,200,827 to the Plaintiff.

(1) The tax amount issued on October 31, 2016, 11,606,870 won 10,51,700 won 1,05,170 won on October 31, 2016, 2016, 6,924,743 won 6,295,221 won 629,522 won on November 30, 2016, 329,522 won on February 28, 2017, 79,53,53,348 won 72,325 won,232,123 won 4. 63,80,80,000 won on February 63, 208, 2008, 16,308 won on June 36, 208, 207;

B. The Plaintiff’s employees agreed to pay the Plaintiff’s benefits and retirement allowances, office expenses, etc. to the Plaintiff, in substance, as the Defendant’s employees.

For this purpose, the Defendant paid the amount of the tax invoice issued by the Plaintiff on convenience by concluding a specialized processing contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

However, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the termination of the contract on November 2016, and did not pay the Plaintiff’s wages, etc. to the Plaintiff’s employees from that time, and also did not pay the Plaintiff’s wages even after being submitted the details of expenses in 2014 to 2016. As such, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 120,200,827 as the agreed amount.

2. Determination

A. On February 27, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant rendered a judgment on the ground of one claim as to the claim for service payment.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.06.27 2017나60736

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.11.18 2016가단73890

-인천지방법원 2020.10.14 2020가단211275

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.01.24 2018가단5248469

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.11.28 2017가단11933