logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.05.20 2018가단5035564
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 36,127,380 won and 6% per annum from March 10, 2018 to May 20, 2019.

Reasons

1. Defendant C and D asserts to the effect that Defendant C and D are not qualified as Defendant C and D in the instant lawsuit seeking the price for the goods supplied to the instant hotel because they did not bear the cost necessary for the operation of the hotel E located in Defendant B and Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City E (hereinafter “instant hotel”) and they became joint business operators of the instant hotel to receive only profit distribution.

On the other hand, in the lawsuit for performance, the standing to be a party is nominal as the plaintiff's claim itself, and such determination is absorptiond into the judgment on the propriety of the claim, so the claimant for his claim for performance is a legitimate plaintiff, and the person alleged as the obligor is a legitimate defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da14797, Jun. 14, 1994). In this case, the plaintiff asserted that defendant C and D are the person liable for the payment of the plaintiff's alleged goods, and filed the lawsuit in this case, and therefore, the defendant C and D, who are alleged as the obligor, are qualified as the defendant as the legitimate defendant.

Therefore, Defendant C and D’s main defense is without merit.

2. Basic facts

A. From March 2008, the Plaintiff has operated the business of providing various equipment to the accommodation establishments in Seoul and Gyeonggi with the trade name of “G”.

B. From 2016 to 2017, the Plaintiff supplied the instant hotel goods worth KRW 208,304,030 to the hotel.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3 through 6 (including each number, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings without dispute

3. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1 of the parties concerned did not supply goods to the hotel of this case operated jointly by the defendants, and the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of unpaid goods to the plaintiff. In domestic affairs, as alleged by the defendants, only some defendants are the defendants for a certain period of time.

arrow