손해배상(기)
1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part is revoked.
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant, which is engaged in the business of manufacturing and supplying the automobile parts to the completed tea company, subcontracted the manufacture and supply of the automobile parts contracted by the completed tea company to the subcontractor including the Plaintiff.
B. C, while operating a mutual business entity called “D” in its spouse’s name, concluded a basic transaction agreement with the Defendant on the supply, etc. of automobile parts, from around 2003 to the end of July 2007, which manufactured and supplied the automobile parts to the Defendant. The subcontract price stipulated in the said basic transaction agreement was the remainder after deducting 25% from the Defendant’s profits from the sales amount to the Defendant’s customer.
C. C discontinued transaction with the Defendant on July 2007 due to business difficulties. Accordingly, the Plaintiff entered into a basic transaction agreement with the Defendant on the manufacture of automobile parts (hereinafter “instant basic transaction agreement”) and supplied the automobile parts to the Defendant from August 2007 to June 2012.
【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1 and 14 (if there is an additional number, including a branch number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion
A. In concluding the instant basic transaction contract with the Defendant, the Plaintiff agreed to receive a subcontract consideration for the remainder after deducting 12% of the Defendant’s profit from the sales amount of the Defendant’s transaction partner. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff the subcontract consideration from August 2007 to October 2007, but paid the subcontract consideration from November 2007 to June 2012, 201 only deducted 25% from the Defendant’s sales amount of the transaction partner. The Defendant’s aforementioned unfair reduction of the subcontract consideration is the Act on Fair Transactions in Subcontracting (hereinafter “subcontract”).
Article IV(1) and (3).