logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.05.30 2017나27732
물품대금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The gist of the parties’ assertion is the same year from March 12, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

4. Until September 19, the Defendant’s construction site G (hereinafter “instant construction site”) supplied construction materials equivalent to KRW 6,673,040 (including value-added tax) in total, which amount to KRW 6,673,040 (including value-added tax). Thus, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff is liable to pay the price for the goods and delay damages.

In regard to this, the Defendant did not conclude a contract for the supply of construction materials with the Plaintiff, and the instant construction site is the place where the contract was cancelled and the construction work was suspended due to the cancellation of the contract while the Defendant entered into a subcontract with the Jinjin Construction Industry Co., Ltd., and even if the Plaintiff supplied construction materials at the instant construction site, the price for the goods shall be paid from the Jinjin Construction Industry Co., Ltd

2. The following circumstances, i.e., whether a contract for the supply of construction materials was concluded or not, the Plaintiff’s order from around March 12, 2016 to the point of entry into the evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including each number), and Nos. 2 and 3 as a whole, comprehensively taking into account the overall purport of the pleadings.

4. By the time of September, 19, C supplied construction materials equivalent to KRW 6,673,040 (including value-added tax) in total at the construction site of this case. At the time, C had a name stating that it is the Defendant’s “chief” and was in charge of the Defendant’s on-site management at the construction site of this case, and himself was referred to as the site chief, and telephone and facsimile numbers entered in the name of the Defendant in the name of the Defendant who was in possession C are the same as the telephone and facsimile numbers entered in the Defendant’s regular official document; at the time of the Plaintiff’s delivery of construction materials to the construction site of this case, C signed the transaction statement with the recipient; the electronic tax invoice was also issued in the Defendant’s name; the Defendant on August 3, 2016 at the construction site of this case.

arrow