logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.11.26 2015가단75882
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 149,147,740 and the interest rate thereon from October 26, 2014 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that supplies food materials, etc. to the estimated lap restaurant, etc., and the Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A”) is a company that operates the D’s “D” in the 35th floor in the Heung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City and the attached lap restaurant. Defendant B is a former representative director of Defendant A and a person who operates the lap restaurant in the 6th floor of the same building as the above D’s lap restaurant.

B. On December 1, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a goods supply contract (hereinafter “instant supply contract”) with the Defendants, and drafted a funeral supply contract (Evidence A) with the Defendants as “A” and “B” with the Defendants as “B.”

C. The Plaintiff supplied food materials to E by August 2014 under the instant supply contract, and the present amount of the goods unpaid is KRW 149,147,740.

Article 7 of the supply contract of this case provides that “In the event the Defendant pays the price of goods on the 25th day following the end of the month and delays the price of goods for at least 30 days, the Defendant shall pay the price in addition to 20% damages for delay per annum.”

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap's entries in Gap's evidence 1 to 5, 7 to 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is a joint party in the sense that the defendants jointly and severally guaranteed their obligations to the plaintiff, and concluded the supply contract of this case with the plaintiff, and the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay food materials supplied to the plaintiff E.

As to this, Defendant A asserts that each supply contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendants was prepared as a single contract for the convenience of the preparation of the contract, and that Defendant A did not have an obligation to pay food materials to Defendant B(E).

(b) The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by adding up the whole purport of the pleadings to each entry in evidence Nos. 6-1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 15, and 17:

(1)

arrow