(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.06.13 2016가단105275

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 2017.06.13 2016가단105275

양수금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Around 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract for construction of military unit facilities (hereinafter “instant contract”) with B, who had been operating a manufacturing company under the trade name “A”, to receive a wing and painting supply corresponding to the foregoing construction materials (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. On August 10, 2013, the husband C, as the actual representative of the above “A”, prepared a written estimate that the price of the supply of the instant contract is KRW 212,450,000 under the instant contract, and delivered it to the Defendant. However, on September 7, 2013, written a supply contract between the Defendant and the Defendant for the supply of the instant contract with the amount of KRW 350,000 (excluding value-added tax) (hereinafter “instant supply contract”).

C. B around November 2013, at the Defendant’s construction site in accordance with the instant contract, completed the wing and driven-out supply, and the Defendant paid KRW 22,008,000 to the Gatoby Steel Co., Ltd. at the request of B on September 11, 2013 and paid KRW 286,00,000 to B as the price for supply of the instant contract until November 28, 2013.

On March 8, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with B to acquire all claims, such as the price of goods, delay damages, etc., of KRW 80 million under the instant supply contract with B, and was delegated with the authority of B to give notice of assignment of claims, and the same month.

9. The Defendant notified the purport of the above transfer.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 4 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff acquired the goods price claim from B to the defendant under the supply contract of this case. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the amount claimed to the plaintiff.

B. First of all, determination is made pursuant to the instant supply contract against the Defendant B.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2016.07.21 2014가합14989

-부산지방법원 2015.06.24 2014가합9666

-수원지방법원안산지원 2014.07.17 2013가단38695

-부산지방법원 2014.12.23 2013가단12224

-의정부지방법원 2017.04.04 2016가단15921