beta
(영문) 청주지방법원충주지원 2015.04.29 2014가단1778

채무부존재확인

Text

1. On November 1, 201, between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the defect in the installation of the OEM based on the purchase contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. (1) On March 7, 2011, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Defendant for the supply of goods (hereinafter “first commodity supply contract”) with the company with the Jhoho Unemployment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Jho unemployment”), and the Defendant entered into a contract with the Seoul subway Line 7, Incheon District Extension 705 construction site of the construction site of this case with the company at the construction site of the Seoul subway Line 7, Incheon District of Section 705.

The contract shall contain the following contents:

Article 2 (Contract Amount and Commodity Statement): 225,50,000 won for the goods (including value-added tax) and 22,550,000 won for the contract deposit (payment date): Article 4 (Notice of Supply) for the goods from March 7, 201 to December 31, 201: The defendant shall, at the time of delivery, notify the tallyman designated by the Jout unemployment to undergo an examination.

Article 11 (Non-performance of Contracts): In a case where the defendant violates the delivery date or any other provision of this Agreement, Jout Unemployment may cancel this Agreement.

At this time, the contract bond naturally reverts to the JI unemployment.

(2) The Defendant entered into a contract for performance guarantee with the Defendant, the insured, the insured’s Jout Unemployment, the insurance amount of KRW 22,550,00 (hereinafter “instant insurance money”) and the insurance period from March 7, 201 to December 31, 2012, with the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd.”), with the content that the Defendant would compensate the Defendant for the damage incurred if the Defendant fails to perform the said contract.

B. On November 1, 2011, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a commodity supply contract with the Defendant, and the Plaintiff concluded with respect to the goods that are subject to supply under the first goods supply contract (including value-added tax) on the price of KRW 180,400,00 (including value-added tax) for the goods that are the goods subject to supply under the first goods supply contract, and the lower-ranking and the lower-price, etc., to be installed and supplied at the instant construction site by December 31, 2012 (hereinafter “second goods supply contract”).

The Plaintiff installed and supplied goods at the instant construction site by May 30, 2012.

(c)in this case;