손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. Summary of the parties' arguments;
A. On August 3, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to manufacture and supply 32 million won in supply price and 65% in the payment period on September 3, 2018 (hereinafter “instant contract”). Upon the Defendant’s prior work request, the Plaintiff completed the production by 65%.
Nevertheless, the Defendant unilaterally reversed the contract and refused to accept the instant goods, thereby causing damages to the Plaintiff. The amount of damages is KRW 20,800,000,000,000, which is equivalent to 65% of the fair value of the instant goods. The Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the said amount.
B. The defendant not only did not conclude the contract of this case with the plaintiff, but also did not request the shipbuilding work of this case. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion based on the premise that the contract of this case was concluded is without merit.
2. Whether the contract of this case was concluded
A. In order to establish the relevant legal principles, in order to ensure that there is a need for the objective agreement of several conflicting declarations between the parties and an objective agreement, all the matters expressed in the parties’ declaration of intent should be the same. On the other hand, even if the content of a contract is not a “material fact” and an objective element of a contract, when the parties expressed their intent to be the requirements for the formation of a contract with significant significance, the contract is lawful and effective only when there is an agreement with regard thereto.
In addition, an offer, which is a legal requirement for the formation of a contract, must be specific and conclusive that the contract is concluded immediately if the offer accepts the offer. Therefore, it is necessary to include matters to the extent that the contents of the contract can be determined.
I would like to say.
B. (See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da53059 delivered on April 11, 2003).
Judgment
The drawing provided by the plaintiff is presented to the defendant.