beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s annual payment of USD 59,625.62 to the Plaintiff during the period from September 26, 2017 to November 29, 2019.
Reasons
1. In this case, where a plaintiff, a foreign corporation having a place of business in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, seeks payment for the goods against the defendant, who is a Korean corporation, having a place of business in the Republic of Korea, the governing law should be determined in accordance with
Article 25 of the Private International Act provides that the governing law of the contractual relationship shall be governed by the law of which the parties have chosen explicitly or implicitly, and that the parties may make an ex post facto choice, and Article 29 provides that the establishment and validity of the contract shall be determined by the governing law to be applied under the Private International Act in case the contract is effective.
In the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to select the governing law of the instant case as the substantive law of the Korean Civil Commercial Act without the application of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods.
Therefore, the Korean Civil Commercial Code, etc. immediately applies to the legal relationship concerning the goods supply contract asserted by the plaintiff as the governing law.
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. The plaintiff asserts that he sold stone to the defendant and sought payment of USD 59,625.62 in the U.S. currency (hereinafter "U.S.") as the price for the goods. The plaintiff asserts that he sold stone to the defendant.
The defendant asserts that although the defendant received stones from C, he did not conclude a contract with the plaintiff for the stone of the plaintiff's assertion.
B. (1) The Plaintiff is a company that has a place of business in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and engages in the transaction of commodities, such as stone, and the Defendant is a company that engages in the business of selling stone.
(2) On July 30, 2017, the Plaintiff, as the recipient of the Defendant, supplied 14CREs (hereinafter “instant stone”) of stone to USD 5,013.93.