logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2020.10.16 2019나40465
물품대금
Text

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed.

The defendant-Counterclaim plaintiff's counterclaim filed in this court.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a wheat distributor, and the defendant is a person who runs a chain manufacturing business C (No. 9 November 9, 1995).

B. A originally operated by the Defendant’s husband D, and D died as a traffic accident on December 2012, and the Defendant operated from around 2013.

C. The Plaintiff supplied C wheat from the time when the Defendant’s husband was operated to May 29, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On May 29, 2018, the Plaintiff asserted that the balance of the price of the goods traded with the Defendant was KRW 28,495,400,00,000, but the Defendant demanded payment of KRW 24,495,400,00 as the principal lawsuit, following the Defendant’s repayment of KRW 4 million around August 2, 2018. The Defendant claimed payment of KRW 24,540,90. The remainder of the price of the goods verified by each other as of April 11, 2013. Since the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with the goods worth KRW 67,227,00,00, the amount of the goods that the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff was KRW 91,767,90,00,000, in total, from around April 16, 2013 to August 2, 2018.

B. Determination 1) In full view of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 8 (including the paper number) and the testimony of witness E of the court of first instance, the plaintiff does not receive full payment of the price of the goods each time when the goods are supplied with the defendant's husband from the time of transaction with the defendant's husband, but from time to time, traded with the goods by means of receiving a partial payment of the price of the goods in advance. To prove this, the plaintiff was confirmed as to the balance of the price of the goods on the receipt from the defendant or the defendant's employee each time when the goods are supplied. Finally, the balance of the price of the goods in the receipt of May 29, 2018 (the balance of the price of the goods in the receipt of the certificate No. 2

arrow