beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.07.15 2019나318278

기계제작대금 청구의 소

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, citing the reasoning of the judgment, is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the portion added as follows, and thus, citing it as it is by the main text of

2. The addition;

A. Under Paragraph 12 of the Defendant’s claim, 30% of the advance payment out of the machinery manufacture price is submitted, and the intermediate payment is 60% after the supply of the instant machinery, and the remainder 10% of the remainder after the final inspection (F.A.T.), and the Plaintiff did not comply with the above payment terms. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim is unreasonable.

The defendant is not obligated to pay the price of machinery manufacturing to the plaintiff unless the plaintiff pre-performances the duty of delivery of the machinery of this case or takes place simultaneously.

B. Determination 1) The right to defense of simultaneous performance is a system that recognizes the relation between each party’s obligation and the other party’s obligation under the principle of equity and good faith and allows the other party to refuse the other party to perform his/her obligation if the other party’s obligation is requested to perform his/her obligation without performing the other party’s obligation or providing the other party’s obligation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Da53899, Apr. 23, 1999). Even if one party to a bilateral contract has placed the other party at the place of receipt, the other party’s right to defense of simultaneous performance held by the other party solely based on the fact that the other party had been offered for performance in the past is not extinguished (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Da2646, Mar. 14, 1995; where one party continues to perform his/her obligation without providing the other party’s obligation, the right to defense of simultaneous performance should be deemed reasonable and extinguished in the bilateral contract.