(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.07.20 2016가단39216

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) 인천지방법원 2017.07.20 2016가단39216

물품대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a juristic person running the distribution business of coffee and beverage, etc., and the Defendant served as the Plaintiff’s business employee from July 2003 to December 2006.

B. The Defendant served in the manner of selling the Plaintiff’s goods to the customer and depositing the sales proceeds. As of June 1, 2006, the amount that the Defendant failed to pay to the Plaintiff for the reason that the Defendant was unable to collect the sales proceeds from the customer, the Defendant reached KRW 65,747,071.

Accordingly, on June 1, 2006, the defendant drafted a written letter of intent to repay the above amount.

(C) The Defendant’s outstanding claim against the Defendant arising while working as the Plaintiff’s employee (hereinafter “instant outstanding claim”).

Since the withdrawal of the Defendant, from June 201 to June 201, the Defendant operated a personal business entity with the trade name “B,” and traded to receive coffee, beverage, etc. from the Plaintiff, and received goods of KRW 172,272,00 in total from January 2, 2012 to April 2014 on ten occasions.

(hereinafter) The Plaintiff’s claim for the price of goods supplied to the Defendant around this time is referred to as “the price of the instant goods”).

The Defendant deposited the money before and after the issuance date of each tax invoice for the instant goods price claim, and deposited the total of KRW 178,006,270 on 19 occasions from February 2, 2012 to April 2014.

(hereinafter the Defendant paid money from the Plaintiff at the time of delivery of the goods (hereinafter “instant payment”). E.

Although the Plaintiff’s delivery of the goods to the Defendant and the repayment amount of the instant goods are not accurately in accord with the various circumstances, the fact that the Plaintiff received all the money equivalent to the amount of the instant goods payment claim from the Defendant does not conflict between the parties.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 8, defendant's examination result, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' arguments.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 마산지원 2016.11.01 2015고단1004

-특허법원 2020.03.20 2019허6815

-광주지방법원 목포지원 2020.03.13 2019고단589

-수원지방법원 2016.04.28 2012가합16707