logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.12.15 2016나7692
물품대금
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. From June 2015 to July 28, 2015, Plaintiff 6,042,00 won was sold to the Defendant, and the Defendant was paid KRW 1,30,000 from the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 4,742,00 ( KRW 6,042,00-1,300-1,300), and delay damages therefrom.

B. The Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with, as the Plaintiff did not receive active terms from the Defendant, and the former employer received active terms and partly repaid the amount.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. From April 3, 2012, the Plaintiff is engaged in the wholesale and retail of fishery products in the trade name “C”, and the Defendant operated a restaurant in the trade name “D” from April 10, 2015.

B. The Plaintiff prepared the account statement with D as follows, and there is no signature of the Defendant on the instant account statement.

Serial Nos. 8,342,00 won 40,942,00 won 7,942,000 won on June 19, 2015 -7,942,000 won on July 3, 2015 7, 942,000 won on July 3, 2015 7,042,000 won 7,042,000 won on July 28, 2015 30, 300 won on July 28, 2015 30,00 won 6,742,000 won on July 28, 2015 6,7,742,000 won on KRW 6,042,00.

C. The Plaintiff did not submit financial data, such as the sales account books by day during the sales period and the card details that received reimbursement.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

3. The instant statement of this case contains only the total amount of active language amounts without the Defendant’s signature, and does not state the type of sales active language and price, etc. Thus, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff sold active language to the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to recognize otherwise, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.

4. Thus, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance with different conclusions shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow