logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.07 2018가합513813
약정금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 383,240,830 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from December 31, 2015 to April 5, 2018.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition BF E C A;

A. The Plaintiff has operated food materials companies with the trade name of “C”, and D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) has operated the same cafeteria.

D The Plaintiff supplied food materials from the Plaintiff to October 27, 2015, issued a statement of transaction of KRW 383,240,830, total amount of the cost of goods until October 27, 2015. On October 27, 2015, F, who operated D’s representative director, the Defendant for the company director E, and D together, issued the following written statement (hereinafter “instant written agreement”) to the Plaintiff on October 27, 2015: (a) the borrower stated each name, address, and resident registration number in the guarantor’s column and signed it; and (b) the Plaintiff issued it.

B. Defendant D continued to be supplied with food materials by the Plaintiff until February 2, 2018 even after the formation of the instant agreement, and on June 22, 2017, Defendant D was served with content-certified mail seeking the payment of goods under the instant agreement, but did not raise an objection thereto.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7 (including a provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the parties' arguments

A. The Plaintiff sought payment of the amount equivalent to 383,240,830 won under the instant agreement, and the Defendant stated only the title "goods price" that the Plaintiff should specify the unpaid goods price of D, and demanded signatures and seals in writing with blanks. The Defendant et al., as the representative director of D, signed and sealed only with the intent to specify the price of the goods as the amount of the goods, the date of repayment, and the date of preparation. Accordingly, the Defendant did not have any obligation to pay the agreed amount under the instant agreement.

As a general rule, it is an example that part of the document is signed and sealed at the time of delivery, so there was a blank blank part at the time of delivery of the document, and it was supplemented later.

arrow