(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.04.21 2015가단116605

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) 의정부지방법원 2016.04.21 2015가단116605

물품대금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 81,529,685 as well as 5% per annum from September 5, 2015 to April 21, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff produced and supplied the packaging paper of livestock products to the Defendant from December 2, 2014 to July 2015, and was not paid KRW 98,971,350 out of the price of the goods until August 27, 2015, the time when the instant lawsuit was filed.

B. The Plaintiff produced a copper plate for the production of the instant livestock product packaging paper, and paid KRW 5,116,670 at its cost.

C. On September 1, 2015, the Defendant paid KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff out of the amount of the goods unpaid.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of claim and the parties’ assertion

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of goods unpaid to the plaintiff (=98,971,350 won - 20,000,000 won) and delay damages.

B. Furthermore, since the Plaintiff is also seeking the payment of the purchase price of the club, the Plaintiff is the Defendant who agreed to bear the price of the club and the purchase price of the club and the Defendant together with the Plaintiff (the preparatory document dated January 11, 2016). However, there is no evidence to prove that there was an agreement under which the Defendant bears all the purchase price of the club and the purchase price. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff can only seek payment against the Defendant against the Plaintiff only 1/2 of the purchase price (=58,335 won (=5,116,670 won/2).

Accordingly, the defendant should settle the price of the copper in consideration of the increased portion of the unit price in the packing paper because the defendant shall pay the price of the copper in consideration of the increased portion of the unit price. Since the club is owned by the defendant, it is argued that the club is to be handed over to the defendant. Thus, there is no evidence to prove that there is an agreement to pay the club price by the method of raising the unit price of the packing paper. Thus, the defendant's above assertion without any need to take

(c)a set-off.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원여주지원 2016.07.19 2016가단2613

-대구지방법원 2017.12.05 2017가단18313

-대구지방법원 2016.10.19 2015나18730

-제주지방법원 2017.01.12 2015고합131

-대구지방법원 2019.11.06 2019나309540