(영문) 춘천지방법원 2019.05.28 2019가단220

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) 춘천지방법원 2019.05.28 2019가단220

물품대금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 45,269,070 as well as 20% per annum from May 11, 2017 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Where there is no dispute between the parties to the judgment as to the cause of the claim, or when comprehensively taking account of the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and the entire arguments, the plaintiff supplied the defendant with materials, such as hardware, to the defendant on March 31, 2017, the closing date of the material price shall be the 31st day of each month, and the defendant entered into a material supply contract with the content that the defendant shall pay the material price by the 10th day of the month following the closing date and pay the compensation for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum, and the plaintiff supplied the defendant with materials equivalent to 45,269,070 won from March 14, 2017 to April 27, 2017.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 45,269,070 as well as damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from May 11, 2017 to the date of full payment.

2. The defendant's assertion argues that since the defendant used the materials supplied by the plaintiff to the subcontracted work from D Co., Ltd., and the plaintiff, the defendant, and D agree that the plaintiff would pay the materials directly to the plaintiff, the defendant's obligation to pay the materials to the plaintiff does not exist.

According to the evidence B No. 1, it can be acknowledged that the fact that D prepares a direct non-payment certificate that the Defendant shall directly pay the materials to the Plaintiff.

However, only with the above direct non-payment confirmation alone, it is difficult to find that the plaintiff finally exempted the defendant from the obligation to pay material costs to the plaintiff, or that D has consented to the defendant's obligation to pay material costs, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is justified and accepted.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.01.22 2018나26269

-청주지방법원 2017.08.24 2016가단19381

-대구지방법원 2014.08.21 2013가합7626

-의정부지방법원 2016.01.15 2015나51082

-인천지방법원 2018.03.21 2017가단206488