beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 36,930,00 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from October 13, 2018 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim
A. On January 9, 2019, the Plaintiff supplied 36,930,000 won to the Defendant, two of thecheon-gu Panel (CEIL) worth 36,930,000 won.
[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings
B. In light of the facts acknowledged above, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 36,930,000 for the goods and the amount calculated by the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from October 13, 2018 to the date of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks.
2. Judgment on the defendant's defense of set-off
A. The summary of the argument 1) due to the defect in the product supplied to the Defendant in relation to four projects (C, D, E/F) by the Plaintiff, the Defendant was liable for damages from the original office (G). 2) The original office (G) did not pay USD 42,372.4 to the Defendant, while offsetting the above amount of damages that the Defendant should receive from the Defendant.
3) The above amount of damages to be borne by the Plaintiff would have been borne by the Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant would have borne USD 42,372.4 on behalf of the Plaintiff, the Defendant would have held against the Plaintiff the claim of USD 42,372.4 on behalf of the Plaintiff. 4) The Defendant’s claim of USD 42,372.4 on behalf of the Plaintiff as the automatic claim against the Plaintiff is set off to the extent of equal amount with the Plaintiff’s claim for the instant goods payment against the Defendant as the passive claim.
B. Each statement in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including additional numbers) submitted by the defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that the damages claim of the original office building (G) is due to the defect in the products supplied by the plaintiff, or that the damages to be borne by the plaintiff are US$ 42,372.4, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the damages to be borne by the plaintiff due to the defect in the products supplied by the plaintiff, and the defendant's defense to offset the above.