beta
Text
1. The Defendant: KRW 136,655,295 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from May 3, 2017 to November 28, 2017; and
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur engaged in wholesale and retail business with the trade name “D” (the name of business registration is “E”) in the Chungcheongnam-nam Budget-gun C, and the Defendant is a person engaged in wedding business, etc. from F to “G” (the name of business registration is “H”).
B. From March 28, 2012 to July 14, 2016, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with goods, such as land, etc. used in the wedding restaurant in the wedding hall, which was operated by the Plaintiff. In applying the unit price for the Plaintiff’s assertion on the said goods, the Defendant’s obligation to pay for the goods unpaid to the Plaintiff is KRW 136,65,295.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 6 (if there are additional numbers, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), purport of whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The summary of the plaintiff's assertion is that the plaintiff supplied the defendant with goods, such as meat, during the transaction period, but the defendant did not pay KRW 136,655,295 among them. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the price for the above goods and the damages for delay. 2) The defendant's assertion that the defendant received the goods, such as meat, etc., of the plaintiff's assertion from the plaintiff during the period in which the plaintiff's assertion was asserted. However, since the unit price is set excessively high, or the price is included in the above price, the plaintiff's claim for the attempted money for the goods cannot be acknowledged, since there is a claim for the attempted money for the goods of the plaintiff's assertion.
Even if the Plaintiff’s above claim is a claim to which the short-term extinctive prescription period of three years is applied under the Civil Act, it shall be deemed that the claim for attempted payment of goods accrued until August 2013 is extinguished due to the completion of prescription.
B. The following facts and circumstances, namely, the Plaintiff, based on each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6, witness I, and the purport of the entire testimony and arguments of J as to the amount of the claim for attempted purchase-price 1.