beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 69,529,595 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 6% from April 3, 2018 to July 19, 2018.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff supplied a fiber of KRW 135,529,595 in total amount from October 27, 2017 to January 25, 2018 in accordance with the order of the Plaintiff, but B paid only KRW 26,00,000 among the above amount, and did not pay the remainder of KRW 109,529,595 in total amount.
B. On March 2, 2018, the Defendant, a director of the Company B, prepared and delivered to the Plaintiff a letter of payment under the Defendant’s personal name (Evidence A No. 1; hereinafter “instant letter of payment”) to the effect that the Defendant would pay KRW 109,529,595 to the Plaintiff by March 30, 2018.
C. B Co., Ltd. paid a total of KRW 40 million to the Plaintiff twice on March 30, 2018 and April 2, 2018.
【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 4
2. 69,529,595 won (i.e., 109,529,595 won - 40,000,000 won, and the purport to be appropriated for the principal) out of the price of the goods supplied to the Plaintiff Company B, the Defendant is entitled to the payment of the above amount in accordance with the instant payment note.
3. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, the defendant is liable for paying the unpaid goods to the plaintiff of the corporation B in accordance with the letter of payment in this case. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the above 69,529,595 won and interest for delay calculated at each rate of 15% per annum under the Commercial Act from April 3, 2018 (referring to the date following the last payment date of the defendant) to July 19, 2018, the original copy of the payment order in this case, which was sought by the plaintiff, until July 19, 2018, the delivery date of the original copy of the payment order in this case.
4. Defendant’s assertion and judgment
A. However, the argument that “the instant payment rejection was made by the Plaintiff’s coercion, intimidation, and reply, and thus, there is a defect in its expression of intent.”