Plaintiff oil supplier Haoxin Petrochemical Trade Co., Ltd. supplied oil to the Chinese M.V. “HUA DONG 808” owned by Defendant shipowner on October 23, 2015, November 1, 2015, November 5, 2015, November 15, 2015 and December 2, 2015, with a total oil payment 731,600 yuan, and issued certificates stating “please settle this oil payment within ten days”. Previously, on October 16, 2015, Plaintiff oil supplier supplied light diesel fuel for the Chinese M.V. “JINLONG 28” operated by Hongyang Shipping Co., Ltd., with a fuel payment 138,360 yuan. Hongyang Shipping Co., Ltd. and lessee Jifa Ship Management Co., Ltd. concluded a time charter contract for the Chinese M.V. “HUA DONG 808”, which stipulated that lessor would supply fuel. On October 18, 2016, entrusted by Hongyang Shipping Co., Ltd., lessee transferred 378,661.90 yuan to Plaintiff oil supplier, and later Hongyang Shipping Co., Ltd. transferred 300,000 yuan to Plaintiff oil supplier. Plaintiff oil supplier filed an action claiming that Defendant shipowner pay the remaining oil payment and interest. The court held that Defendant shipowner should pay the oil payment involved, as Defendant shipowner and Plaintiff oil supplier concluded an oil supply contract, and the payment behavior of Hongyang Shipping Co., Ltd. and Jifa Ship Management Co., Ltd. could not exempt or transfer Defendant shipowner’s obligation to pay the oil payment involved. In addition, 300,000 yuan transferred by Hongyang Shipping Co., Ltd. to Plaintiff oil supplier should first be used to pay fuel payment of the Chinese M.V. “JINLONG 28”, as fuel payment of the Chinese M.V. “JINLONG 28” was generated before oil payment of the Chinese M.V. “HUA DONG 808” and Hongyang Shipping Co., Ltd. failed to prove that it had paid fuel payment of the Chinese M.V. “JINLONG 28” separately. According to the principle of prioritizing the payment of the oil payment that occurred first, Defendant shipowner should pay the remaining amount 191,298.1 yuan and pay corresponding interest.