beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's selective claims added in the trial are dismissed.
3. Appeal.
Reasons
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the ground for the court’s explanation is the same as the ground for the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff added a judgment on the additional selective claims in the court of first instance; and (b) thus, (c) it is citing
2. Determination as to the selective claims that the Plaintiff added at the trial
A. The Plaintiff’s husband B was supplied with water tanks from D on April 29, 2009 to September 2012. In 2009, B entered into each of the above transactions under the Defendant’s name registered as “C” in the name of “C” in the name of “C” in the year 2010, and “C” in the name of “C” in the name of “B” in the name of “C” in the name of “B” in the name of “C” in the name of its representative director from April 29 to September 2012. However, B entered into a transaction with D in the name of “D” in the name of the Defendant from 2011 to 2011, on behalf of the Defendant, agreed that B take over or reimburse the outstanding debt 11,231,304 won arising from transactions in the name of E and F.
3) From 2011 to September 2012, 201, 9,811,262 won (i.e., full repayment and excess repayment of the obligation of KRW 111,231,304) was met for the obligation of KRW 111,231,304 (i.e., KRW 101,42). Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff who acquired the claim for the price of the goods from DNA (i.e., KRW 111,231,304 - KRW 9,811,262) and damages for delay.
B. Determination 1) In full view of the evidence Nos. 5, 19-1, 2, and 12-1, 2-2 of evidence Nos. 1, 10, and 11 of evidence Nos. 12, and part of evidence Nos. 110 and 11 of evidence Nos. 110, and the purport of the whole pleadings as to witness G of the trial party, the Defendant was provided with water tank from DNA in 2010 in the name of F registered as “C” and the goods price liability for B’s DNA remaining as of December 31, 2010 can be acknowledged as constituting 11,231,304. Furthermore, as alleged by the Plaintiff, the Defendant, as of December 31, 2010, against B’s DNA until December 31, 2010.