logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2015.07.01 2014나2198
물품대금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Customer registration number (A) customer registration number of basic facts: The third floor number of the building D in Gangnam-gu Seoul: The name of the E company/representative: C (B) service provider/representative: July 2, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as "A") and F (hereinafter referred to as "B") of the F company A contract date; two copies of the contract shall be prepared in order to conclude and prove the agreement as follows; and one copy of the contract shall be kept after signing and sealing B, respectively.

Maren service contract summary statement

1. Name of a service contract for rental of the relevant machine: Basic rate of 120,000 won (per month): 120,000 won (in addition to addition tax) basic rate of 10,000 won, 10,000 won in black margin and 10,000 won in addition, and 150 won in rental service contract name: PC monitor rental service charge (monthly): 70,000 won in basic rate;

A. On July 2012, the Plaintiff drafted a siren service contract with the content that the Plaintiff would lease a complex and PC (hereinafter “instant contract”). The main contents of the said contract are as follows.

B. According to the instant contract, the Plaintiff leased a composite term and PC from July 16, 2012 to August 15, 2013 pursuant to the instant contract, and paid KRW 655,80, which is a part of the rent, to KRW 2,036,850.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant Company completed the registration of incorporation on September 6, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion asserts that C is the representative of the defendant company and therefore, the defendant company is obligated to pay the plaintiff the unpaid rent amount of KRW 2,036,850 and delay damages.

As to this, the defendant company prepared the contract of this case as a contracting party to the contract of this case, and the defendant company at the time of the contract of this case is not yet established and thus cannot be seen as a party to the contract of this case.

arrow