(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2017.03.31 2016가단4624

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) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2017.03.31 2016가단4624

추심금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Suwon District Court for a payment order against A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”) under the Suwon District Court Branch 2015 tea2303, and the said payment order was finalized on August 19, 2015 upon receipt of a payment order issued by the said court on June 16, 2015.

B. The plaintiff is the above A.

On February 16, 2016, the Suwon District Court issued a seizure and collection order as to the claim amounting to KRW 40,946,228 of the goods price claim until May 25, 2015 against the Defendant of the Defendant of the Defendant of the Suwon District Court as the title of execution of the payment order under paragraph (1).

The defendant was served with the above order on February 19, 2016.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserts that: (a) there is KRW 40,946,228 of the price claim for the goods as of May 25, 2015 against the Defendant; and (b) the Plaintiff served the Defendant with the issuance of a seizure and collection order on the said claim; and (c) the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the collection amount of KRW 40,946,228 and the delay damages therefrom.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that there is no claim for the price of goods against the defendant A, and the issue of this case is whether the claim for the price of goods against the defendant A exists.

B. In full view of the following circumstances, the Plaintiff’s determination as to the existence of a claim for the payment of goods against the Defendant A submitted the evidence corresponding thereto, but can be recognized by comprehensively taking account of the entries in the evidence No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 and the overall purport of the pleadings, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff had a claim for the payment of goods as of May 25, 2015 against the Defendant as alleged by the Plaintiff, as alleged by the Plaintiff, KRW 40,946,228 of the purchase price of goods as of May 25, 2015, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge

① The head of the transaction partner Party A is indicated as “the primary distribution store” by the transaction partner.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2017.02.08 2016가단4594

-수원지방법원안산지원 2017.05.19 2016가단2987

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.01 2015가단28911

-수원지방법원안산지원 2017.06.08 2016가합1110

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.07 2015가단5231026