logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2017.02.09 2016가단5255
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed to the Plaintiff KRW 27,704,902 and Defendant A Co., Ltd. from April 16, 2016.

Reasons

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the whole pleadings as to Gap evidence Nos. 1-1-6, Gap evidence No. 2, Gap evidence No. 3-1-5, Gap evidence No. 4-32, and evidence No. 5-28, and there is no counter-proof.

On July 6, 2011, Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”) drafted a certificate of credit purchase amount of KRW 196,771,550 (hereinafter “instant certificate”), and Defendant B signed the instant certificate as a joint guarantor.

B. Of the balance of the credit purchase amount based on the instant certificate, KRW 3,771,50 of the goods price, KRW 23,93,352 of the slaughter fee, KRW 27,704,90 of the aggregate amount was not paid until December 2015.

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 27,704,902 not paid out of the balance of credit purchase under the instant written confirmation, and the Defendant Company from April 16, 2016, the day following the delivery of the duplicate of the instant complaint, and Defendant B is jointly and severally liable to pay damages for delay at the interest rate of 15% per annum from April 19, 2016 to the day of full payment, respectively.

B. The defendant's defense is proved to the purport that the defendant cannot pay the plaintiff the balance of the credit purchase price based on the letter of confirmation of this case, since the defendant's judgment on the defendant's defense was caused by corruption and damage to the defendant due to the high temperature of the core temperature of the f

The written evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 2 alone is insufficient to recognize that the damage was inflicted on the Defendant due to corruption because the core temperature of the money supplied by the Plaintiff was high, as alleged by the Defendant. The damage is sustained even if the above damage was inflicted on the Defendant.

arrow