beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 32,167,940 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from October 1, 2015 to May 23, 2016.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a business entity that runs oil sales business in the name of “Criju station” in the Gyeongbuk-gun B, and the Defendant is a business entity that runs construction business, etc. in the 61st central city of Gyeongbuk-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.
B. The Plaintiff supplied fuel of KRW 5,161,200 (including value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) on July 11, 2015, and KRW 11,97,600 on August 11, 2015, and KRW 22,170,340 on September 22, 170, and KRW 39,329,140 on September 22 of the same year.
C. The Plaintiff paid 32,167,940 won of the remainder of the oil payment (=39,329,140 won-5,161,200 won) from the Defendant on August 27, 2015, and KRW 2 million on November 28, 2015, but did not receive the remainder of the oil payment (=39,329,140 won-5,161,200 won-2 million).
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 8 (including each number in the case of additional number), the statement or image of Gap's 1 through 8, the witness D's testimony, and the purport of whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the aforementioned unpaid oil payment of KRW 32,167,940 and damages for delay at each rate of KRW 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from October 1, 2015 to May 23, 2016, and KRW 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of full payment, unless there are special circumstances.
B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion 1) is that the Defendant renounced the work at the Sungju reservoir since July 2015, and thus there was no supply of oil from the Plaintiff. The company receiving the instant oil is not the Defendant, but the Defendant, but the other company performing dredging work (hereinafter “Sesung aggregate”).
(2) Nevertheless, the Plaintiff is in a situation in which the Plaintiff is unable to receive the oil payment from sexual aggregate and is responsible for the Defendant. (2) Determination Nos. 7 through 12 is based on each of the evidence A.