손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The Plaintiff asserts that, while the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff, the defective quality occurred between October 2013 and July 2014, the Plaintiff did not re-enter the 682 Chinese Panel for exchange or repair on or around August 2014, and that, around the first place, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 136,632,727 as the restitution due to the implied rescission of the goods supply contract or the cancellation of the performance refusal. The Plaintiff sought the same amount as the compensation for delay of performance.
However, the Defendant has against the Plaintiff rehabilitation claims based on the table of rehabilitation creditors of the Seoul Central District Court 2015 Ma10008 rehabilitation case. The Plaintiff asserted the same claim as to 682 panel, and the offset against the Defendant’s damage claim or unjust enrichment return claim is an automatic claim based on the grounds for objection, which is the grounds for objection to the exclusion of the executory power of the said table of rehabilitation creditors, and has become final and conclusive.
(Seoul Rehabilitation Court Decision 2018Da100265 Decided January 14, 2019; Supreme Court Decision 2019Na10003 Decided November 6, 2019; Supreme Court Decision 2019Na10003 Decided November 22, 2019; and written evidence Nos. 1 and 3. The plaintiff declared his/her intention of offset at the appellate court of the objection filed against the plaintiff on April 12, 2019, and served the defendant on April 18, 2019.
The declaration of set-off was that the plaintiff's damage claim or the claim for return of unjust enrichment due to the plaintiff's refusal of performance equivalent to KRW 158,145,542 against the defendant is an automatic claim, and the defendant's rehabilitation claim against the plaintiff is set-off within an equal amount with the defendant's rehabilitation claim as a passive claim.
The appellate court did not recognize a set-off on the grounds that there is no evidence to acknowledge the defendant's liability for damages caused by nonperformance or the return of unjust enrichment.
Determination as to whether or not a claim alleging a set-off is constituted shall be limited to the amount set up against it.