logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2021.02.18 2017가합103226
물품대금
Text

1. On the part of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant):

A. Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) Co., Ltd. 498,231,119 won and double 471,337.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The parties’ status and the relevant Plaintiff are corporations engaged in the production and supply of blood white, blood alcohol, blood cryp, etc., Defendant B are corporations engaged in the wholesale and trade of blood white, white, reagents, and medical equipment, and Defendant C is the representatives of Defendant B.

B. On May 24, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a transaction agreement with Defendant B (the company name at the time: D) as follows (hereinafter “instant agreement”). Defendant C jointly and severally guaranteed all the future goods payment obligations owed by Defendant B to the Plaintiff.

Article 1 of the Agreement on Trade: The plaintiff shall sell the product at the price agreed upon by the defendant B in accordance with the order of the contract, and the defendant B shall pay the price within 60 days.

(A) Article 8: This Arrangement shall take effect from the date of the Arrangement, and shall remain effective if there is no objection by the plaintiff or defendant B.

2) On October 1, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a goods supply contract with Defendant B, and the Plaintiff supplied blood white, written white, white, F, G, and H within 60 days, and Defendant B paid the price for the goods within 60 days, and one party entered into a goods supply contract with the effect that the contract may be terminated if the contract violates the terms and conditions of the contract and is infinite.

(c)

The Plaintiff supplied the goods to Defendant B in accordance with the instant supply contract. Defendant B delayed the payment of the goods equivalent to KRW 498,231,119 in total to the Plaintiff.

2) On November 7, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to Defendant B a statement to the effect that “The instant supply contract is terminated because Defendant B failed to perform the obligation to pay the goods under the instant supply contract on five occasions,” and around that time, the said public notice reached Defendant B.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 11, Eul 4, and all pleadings.

arrow