1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

Plaintiff’s assertion

The plaintiff is a cargo transport business entity, and the defendant is a person who engages in transportation business with the trade name B.

The Plaintiff entered into a transport contract with the Defendant and provided transport services equivalent to KRW 22,539,00 from December 31, 2012 to August 31, 2013. The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid transport charges of KRW 5,909,00 (i.e., the unpaid transport charges of KRW 2,719,00 from December 31, 2012 to February 28, 2013) and the delay damages therefrom.

Judgment

According to the evidence evidence Nos. 6-1 through 4 of the unpaid transport charges of KRW 2,719,00 from December 31, 2012 to February 28, 2013, the Plaintiff provided transportation charges of KRW 2,20,00 on December 31, 2012, KRW 1,672,00 on the same day, KRW 1,364,00 on January 31, 203, KRW 363,00 on February 28, 2013, and KRW 363,00 on the same date, and issued each tax invoice. The Plaintiff appears to have provided additional transportation charges of KRW 110,00 on December 31, 201 to KRW 31,00 on the same date; the Plaintiff appears to have provided transportation charges of KRW 30,00 on December 31, 201 to KRW 30,000 on the same date; the Plaintiff appears to have provided the aforementioned transportation charges of KRW 3130.1.28.

It can be recognized that the sum of the above transport charges of KRW 2,719,000 has not been paid.

However, according to each of the above evidence and Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 through 6 (including numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings, each of the above tax invoices was issued against C (D), and the plaintiff was awarded a favorable judgment by filing a lawsuit against C (C) claiming the payment of the above unpaid transportation charges (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014DaDa93031, Jan. 5, 2015). The judgment became final and conclusive on February 7, 2015, and the fact that the plaintiff was recorded as the creditor of the above transportation charges claim against C in the creditor list of the personal rehabilitation case against C (Seoul District Court 2013Da1423666).