logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.07.16 2013나19189
매매대금
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who has run a wholesale and retail business with the trade name of “B gas station,” and the Defendant is a company that runs domestic and foreign travel business, chartered bus transportation business, etc.

B. The Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of KRW 5,00,000 (hereinafter “each of the instant tax invoices”) to the Defendant on April 30, 2010, June 30, 2010, July 31, 2010, July 31, 2010, and September 30, 2010, respectively.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 4, and 2

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant does not pay the amount of oil in total of KRW 20,000,000 ( KRW 5,000,000 x 4) to the defendant on credit as stated in each of the tax invoices in this case. Thus, the defendant asserts that the defendant is liable to pay the amount of oil in total of KRW 20,000,000 and damages for delay.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that although each of the tax invoices of this case was issued by the plaintiff, the plaintiff did not receive oil on credit from the plaintiff, and that the price of the oil supplied was already paid in full.

B. Determination: (a) the following facts and circumstances are comprehensively taken into account each description of evidence Nos. 1 through 4; (b) the testimony and the entire arguments of the witness C of the party trial; (c) the Plaintiff was supplied with the instant oil from the Plaintiff; (d) D was paid gas at the Plaintiff’s gas station from January 2010 to September 2010; and (e) C paid the oil at the Plaintiff’s gas station from June 2008 to December 2010; and (c) during the said transaction period, C paid the oil by cash and was not provided with the oil on credit; and (d) the Plaintiff issued the No. 3 (the copy of the passbook; hereinafter referred to as the “instant accumulated passbook”) to induce the customer of the gas station to approve the cash; and (e) the Plaintiff subsequently granted the accumulated passbook by issuing the same type of passbook and paying the purchase price in cash according to the purchase amount in cash.

arrow