손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On June 26, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Nonparty C to purchase the instant contract (hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”) by setting the sales amount of KRW 29,700,00 (including value added tax) with respect to the instant machines (hereinafter referred to as “instant machines”) including the upper and lower cost, with the introduction of Nonparty C.
B. On June 26, 2017, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 27.2 million to the Defendant, and KRW 2.5 million on June 23, 2017, and paid all the purchase price of the instant machinery.
(c)
C received KRW 6 million from the Defendant on June 26, 2017 in relation to the instant contract, and KRW 3 million on June 27, 2017.
(d)
On November 7, 2017, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to the effect that “the Defendant supplied the instant machinery (including the upper roadway) on June 26, 2017, but did not comply with it until November 7, 2017.” On November 13, 2017, the Plaintiff requested that “the Plaintiff complete the instant machinery by November 13, 2017.” On June 8, 2018, the Plaintiff performed the instant machinery to ensure that it can normally operate the instant machinery by June 15, 2018, and, if not performed, sent to the Plaintiff a certified mail proving the content of “the damages incurred by the instant machinery costs and the installation of the instant unit to compensate for damages amounting to KRW 45,362,00.”
【Fact- without dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Eul evidence No. 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant did not take measures to ensure the normal operation of the instant machine, and that the Plaintiff did not use the instant machine due to the Defendant’s nonperformance of obligations.
Therefore, the Defendant totaled KRW 45,362,00 (29,70,000,000,000,000 for the instant machines) as damages to the Plaintiff, and the amount of delayed damages from June 16, 2018, which the Plaintiff cancelled on the ground of the Defendant’s nonperformance of obligation.