손해배상(기)
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) pays KRW 7,359,510 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).
2. The remainder of the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is running the manufacture and sales business of textile products with the trade name called C, and the Defendant also engaged in the manufacture and sales business of direct products with the trade name called D. When the Defendant provided the Plaintiff with the original intent, the Plaintiff was in the position of the original specifications and supplied the original specifications to the Defendant, and the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the processed costs, such as the fee for the removal.
B. On April 2, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s employee (director) released “F” 8,795Y (H) from around August 2, 2013 without the Plaintiff’s approval. In the Daegu District Prosecutors’ Office on October 31, 2014, the said original group was released without the Plaintiff’s statement of transaction, etc., and the fact that the original group was bad was released from the original unit, but the Defendant released the defective original unit to the Plaintiff for the claim for damages, and on the ground that it is difficult to avoid the possibility that E, a person in charge, could not make oral reports to the Plaintiff, the Defendant and E were suspected.
In addition, the plaintiff filed a complaint against the defendant against attempted fraud, and the Daegu District Prosecutors' Office requested that the defendant return the original intent equivalent to KRW 6 million in the market price to the plaintiff or compensate for the equivalent amount of the value, despite the fact that the defendant did not achieve such intent, but ordered the defendant to suspend indictment in consideration of the defendant's criminal history and minor nature and circumstances.
C. The Plaintiff and the Defendant maintain business relations by the beginning of 2014.
Around August 12, 2014, the Defendant demanded that the Plaintiff pay KRW 11,592,415 to the Plaintiff on the ground of the defective removal from office. Accordingly, the Plaintiff paid KRW 34,964,706 in total due to the Plaintiff’s payment of unpaid job fees and defective specifications on August 13, 2014.