logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.04.06 2017나4221
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. As to the counterclaim within the scope of the trial of this Court, the court of first instance cited it, which was not appealed by the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed but withdrawn it, and the counterclaim was excluded from the scope of the trial of this Court.

2. The facts of recognition: ① The Plaintiff is a person operating the meat processing and retail chain C; the Defendant is a person operating the DNA set up by July 2016; ② The fact that E served as the Defendant’s employee until July 25, 2016 does not conflict between the parties.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5 as well as the entire arguments, the Defendant is recognized to have discharged KRW 5,00,000 out of the sales price of the instant transaction to the Plaintiff on July 15, 2016.

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff should pay the purchase price of the meat to the plaintiff regardless of the internal issues between the defendant and E, since the plaintiff delivered the meat in accordance with the order of E, which is the defendant's employer, who is the defendant who is delegated with the authority to sell the meat of Dat.

(G) In light of the fact that the Plaintiff himself/herself was running the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff is an employee of the Defendant with a partial comprehensive power of attorney, and thus, a valid land sale and purchase contract was concluded pursuant to the order of E’s meat, and the Plaintiff transferred the land to E, and thus the Defendant is obliged to pay the purchase price. Accordingly, it is denied that the Defendant made the instant transaction with the Plaintiff until the end of June 2016, and that there was no fact that the instant transaction was conducted.

An employee who has been entrusted with certain branches of business or specified matters relating to business may effect all acts other than judicial acts.

arrow