beta
(영문) 창원지방법원통영지원 2016.09.08 2016가합10182

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in the vessel processing business under the trade name “B,” and the Defendant is a company engaged in the vessel building, design, processing, and parts manufacturing business.

The installation of various kinds of wood stuffs, such as stairs, heating systems, air conditioning systems, etc. inside and outside the line rooms of the eropia Korea's captain of the eropia Korea, to install line installation and maintenance line works to supply electricity in the front line room B, and installation of various wood stuffs, such as pedagogs inside and outside the line rooms of the pipe iron found.

B. As to a ship (COT ship, CONT ship, LNG ship, SHTS ship, COT ship for crude oil transport, CONG ship for container transport, LNG ship for natural gas transport, SHL ship for general transport, and VLCC ship for primary raw milk transport) construction, the Defendant is part of a ship from Samsung Heavy Industries, the ordering person, which is a structure that makes it possible for seafarers to live in a ship.

The manufacture was entrusted by the subcontractor, and the subcontractor entrusted the manufacture to three business entities, such as B, D, C, and C, Korea, which are subcontractors. The specific details of entrustment by each business entity are as listed below:

C. From February 2010 to May 201, 201, the Defendant entrusted three subcontractors, including B, with the manufacture of 1783 lines, 1783, 1781, 1784, 1918, 1919, 1860, 1927, 1943, 1805 lines, LNG lines 1810, 1812 lines, 15% of the existing unit price. From January 201 to July 201, the Defendant reduced the unit price of work to 3 subcontractors, including B, by 1785 lines, 178, 184, 184, 1919, 186, 1937, 180, 204 lines, 205 lines of work, 205 lines of work, 204 lines of work, 205 lines of work, 170, 1937, 298-17.

The Fair Trade Commission decided May 19, 2015, No. 2015-164, three subcontractors, such as Defendant and B.