(영문) 제주지방법원 2015.10.21 2014나1805 | 리걸엔진

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) 제주지방법원 2015.10.21 2014나1805

청구이의

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a return of the material price on the ground that “the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff, May 14, 2013, with construction materials equivalent to KRW 22,00,000,000, and the Plaintiff did not pay the price until May 31, 2013,” with the Jeju District Court Decision 201Hu2638, the Defendant filed an application for a payment order against the Plaintiff for a payment order on October 7, 2013. The said court held that “the Plaintiff paid the Plaintiff KRW 22,00,000 to the Defendant from June 1, 2013 to the delivery date of the original copy of the instant payment order, and the amount calculated at each rate of KRW 20,000 per annum from the next day to the full payment date,” and that the said payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) was issued and the Plaintiff did not dispute between the parties or is recognized by the purport of the entire pleading.

2. The party's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted 1) on May 14, 2013, since there was no supply of construction materials equivalent to KRW 22,00,000 from the Defendant, compulsory execution based on the instant payment order shall be denied. 2) Furthermore, the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff on May 14, 2013 with materials equivalent to KRW 22 million. In this case, the Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff would pay KRW 22 million to the Defendant on behalf of the subcontractor. Accordingly, even with the Defendant’s assertion, compulsory execution based on the instant payment order should be denied.

B. First of all, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by considering the following: (a) whether the Plaintiff agreed to pay the material price that C would have to pay directly to the Defendant; (b) the statement of No. 4-1 and No. 2; (c) the witness D and C’s testimony and arguments as a whole; (d) the Plaintiff was performing the construction of a pent Corporation in Seopo City E around February 2013; and (e) at the time.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원오산시법원 2020.02.06 2019가단2241

-광주지방법원 목포지원 2018.12.12 2018가단2286

-창원지방법원김해시법원 2017.07.26 2016가단1097

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.08.28 2015나12337