beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff's assertion and the defendant have traded goods with each other. Since the plaintiff paid KRW 1,604,721 to the defendant, the defendant is obligated to pay the above KRW 1,604,721 to the plaintiff.
(A) The following circumstances are acknowledged in light of the purport of the entire pleadings, even if the transactions between the Plaintiff and A are included in some of the above transactions. 2. 2. Determination of the Plaintiff, and each of the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 22 (including the number of pages) submitted by the Plaintiff is insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, the following circumstances are acknowledged in light of the purport of the entire pleadings in the items of evidence Nos. 4, 6, 10, 13, and Nos. 2 and 3.
① Around September 10, 2012, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to confirm that the balance of the Plaintiff’s goods payment obligation due to the transaction between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is KRW 10,460,307, and accordingly, requested the Plaintiff to confirm the balance of the transaction. Accordingly, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 10,460,000 to the Defendant around February 12, 2013. The Plaintiff had already confirmed the transaction balance between the Plaintiff and the Defendant and transferred the balance.
② The Plaintiff asserted that the claim for refund amounting to KRW 1,604,721 remains on the basis of the Customer Director (Evidence A 4). However, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant completed the settlement upon the Defendant’s request to confirm the balance with the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff traded goods subject to taxation and goods subject to non-taxation (Evidence A6, No. 10) with the Defendant, but the Plaintiff paid KRW 16,416,192 to the Defendant, but the Plaintiff paid KRW 19,261,220 to the Defendant for KRW 19,261,220 on the transaction of goods subject to taxation (Evidence A 6, No. 100, and No. 104,721, which was partially set off after the Plaintiff’s occurrence of the claim for refund amounting to KRW 1,604,721 on June 25, 2012.