정산금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasons why the court of first instance cited the judgment are the reasons why the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered, except for the cases where the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed as set forth in the following 2. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of
2. The height of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows up to nine lines from the fourth to nine lines.
“A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is either the amount executed for the period after the completion of the research and development period or the amount unrelated to the performance of the instant research and development task. As such, Article 17-2(5) of the Convention, Article 19(4) and (9) [Attachment 2-2] of the instant provision 1-A-2 or attached Table 1-C-A-2 of the instant provision, the amount shall be recovered pursuant to Article 17-2(5) of the Convention, Article 19(4) and (9) [Attachment 2-2] of the instant provision. Of the research and development costs used at the time of the instant study, the Defendant shall return to the Plaintiff KRW 151,114,764, excluding KRW 32,60,000, out of the instant amount of the instant non-recognized research and development costs,
A. Pursuant to the proviso (1) of the proviso, “the direct cost, during the research execution period, executed by the time the report on the actual usage was completed” constitutes “the direct cost,” and the amount is related to the performance of the instant research and development task, and the Defendant is not obligated to return the amount to the Plaintiff.” From the fifth to the seventh to the seventh four sides of the judgment of the first instance.
1) First, Article 17-2(5) of the Convention, and Article 19(4) and 19(9) [Attachment 2-2] 1-A of the instant provision, which was executed for the period after the completion of the research and development period.
We examine the plaintiff's assertion that it should be recovered pursuant to the main sentence of paragraph.
The non-recognition amount of this case was executed on August 24, 2015 based on the instant service contract concluded on August 21, 2015, and since the research and development period of this case was up to December 20, 2015, the subsequent research and development period was up to December 20, 2015, Article 19(9) of the instant provision.