(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.05.03 2018가단20036

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) 서울서부지방법원 2019.05.03 2018가단20036

물품대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. During the period of Ansan-gu, the Defendant awarded a contract to E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) for the new construction of the D-based building, and the Nonparty Company awarded a subcontract for the electrical construction among the new construction works to G engaged in construction business (electric construction) in the trade name of “F”.

B. The Plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply of lighting fixtures equivalent to KRW 32,657,90 (including value-added tax) between G and G at the construction site of 2018, and supplied lighting fixtures at the time of May 12, 2018, and signed by G, etc. with the purport that the Plaintiff supplied lighting fixtures equivalent to KRW 33,378,290 (including value-added tax) around May 12, 2018.

On the other hand, on April 30, 2018, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice consisting of 23,521,850 of the total amount of supply and tax on April 30, 2018, and a tax invoice consisting of 9,817,940 of the total amount of supply and tax on May 31, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff requested that G pay the price of the goods because he did not receive the price of the goods even though he supplied all lighting fixtures at the above construction site. G cannot pay the price of the goods because it did not receive the price of the goods from the non-party company, and the non-party company also asked the Defendant to receive the price of the goods directly from the Defendant because it did not receive the price of the goods. The Plaintiff requested that the Defendant pay the price of the goods. On June 21, 2018, the Defendant convened about 10 sub-contractors including the Plaintiff at the above construction site and convened about 10 sub-contractors including the Plaintiff at the above construction site to pay the price of the goods directly to the sub-contractor (as the settlement process with the non-party company does not want, the signature of sub-contractors including the Plaintiff is written in evidence No. 4).

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2019.10.18 2018가단130630

-수원지방법원 2014.09.26 2014가합4333

-부산지방법원서부지원 2020.05.26 2019가단107959

-수원지방법원 2015.07.17 2015나6736

-인천지방법원부천지원 2020.11.26 2020가단7349