(영문) 대구지방법원 김천지원 2018.11.15 2017가단4955

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) 대구지방법원 김천지원 2018.11.15 2017가단4955

물품대금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 49,50,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from October 11, 2017 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant concluded a contract with C regarding the new construction of building B located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Ulsan-gun (hereinafter “instant building”), and the Plaintiff supplied phishs and shoess at the aforementioned construction site.

B. The Defendant issued a tax invoice of KRW 55,000,000, which is a part of the price of Washington and Singing, to the Plaintiff.

C. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a payment order claiming KRW 5,500,000 against the Defendant (Seoul District Court Decision 2017 tea760), and the Defendant did not raise any objection and became final and conclusive due to the Defendant’s failure to do so.

(hereinafter referred to as the "Lump Sum Payment Order"). 【No dispute over the issue of whether there is any evidence, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence No. 1, witness D and C's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. As to whether the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the price for the construction price directly to the Plaintiff, the following circumstances are acknowledged as follows: (i) the Defendant attempted to transfer one of the instant buildings to the Plaintiff by payment in lieu of payment in lieu of payment in lieu of payment in lieu of payment in lieu of the Plaintiff; (ii) the payment order for the part of the Plaintiff’s claim for the payment in lieu of payment in lieu of payment in lieu of the Plaintiff was finalized; (iii) the Plaintiff was issued a provisional attachment order for the payment in lieu of the Plaintiff’s claim for the construction price; (iv) the Defendant did not pay the construction price for the subcontractor on the ground that provisional attachment of the subcontractor; and (v) the subcontractor did not pay the construction price for the subcontractor on the ground that there was no settlement with C; and (v) the Defendant did not consent to the payment in lieu of payment in lieu of payment in lieu of a part of the Plaintiff’s claim for the payment in lieu of payment in lieu of payment in lieu of deposit; and

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2014.10.14 2013가단33150

-부산지방법원 2018.06.07 2018나135

-서울북부지방법원 2015.06.30 2014나6228

-수원지방법원 2012.11.15 2012노3468

-청주지방법원 2014.11.12 2013가단154634