beta
(영문) 부산고등법원 2016.12.08 2015나54820

실시료 청구의 소

Text

1. The defendant (Counterclaim) who ordered the payment of more than the following money out of the part against the main claim of the judgment of the court of first instance.

Reasons

1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as stated in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination on patent fees and royalties claims in the principal lawsuit

A. The Defendant agreed to pay to the Plaintiff a patent fee and royalties of KRW 2.762 billion based on the construction completion rate, and the Defendant paid KRW 1.381 billion to the Plaintiff as seen earlier, and the fact that the construction of the instant case was completed is not a dispute between the parties, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid patent fee and royalties of KRW 1.3881 billion (= KRW 2.762 billion - KRW 1.381 billion), barring special circumstances, value-added tax of KRW 1.381 million (= KRW 1.381 billion) on the unpaid patent fee and royalties of KRW 1.381 billion (= KRW 1.381 billion).

B. The Defendant’s assertion and its determination 1) The Defendant’s assertion (A) did not receive approximately KRW 1.8 billion for the construction cost from the SK Construction and Geum Ho industry, the original contractor, and the additional construction cost, etc., and the Defendant did not receive the Plaintiff a total of KRW 16 billion for additional construction cost. As such, the Defendant is not obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remaining patent fee and royalties, excluding KRW 286,000,000,000,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. (B) In order to receive the patent fees and royalties from the Defendant, the Plaintiff did not properly perform the obligations related to the division of duties under Article 6 of the instant contract, the duty of cooperation under Article 7, and the construction technology support under Article 8, but did not delay or neglect the payment, and thus, the amount of damages should be reduced or offset from the patent