logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원평택지원 2019.05.14 2018가단62698
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 111,527,144 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from October 26, 2018 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Around November 2017, the Defendant’s affiliated organizations ordered “D contracts” as part of the business of managing facilities in Gwangju Metropolitan City, Gwangju Metropolitan City C.

B. On November 24, 2017, the Defendant’s facility department: (a) attached a design statement stating the detailed goods specification and quantity on November 24, 2017; and (b) formulated a purchase plan of Category 83 393 (basic price of KRW 1,178,530,000); (c) via the financial department, the Defendant’s facility department announced the purchase of the said goods by the total bidding method in the national electronic electronic electronic procurement of the national master market as follows.

D

C. However, among the documents attached to the above public notice of tender, the design and specifications were included only in the 80th class 379 articles, and there were 1,650Ax 860AL 1,280Ax 670L 12,3450Ax 540L 1, and 3th class 14 new construction officers (hereinafter “the 14th class article”) were missing.

On December 19, 2017, the Plaintiff was selected as a successful bidder in the said bidding, and entered into this contract with the Defendant for the total contract amount of KRW 945,543,170, and for the period from the date of concluding the delivery term to September 1, 2018 (hereinafter “instant contract”). The design specifications and specifications attached to the said contract were missing as well as the notice of tender announcement.

E. Around April 2018, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the supply of the instant 14 goods that were not included in the instant contract. Around July 25, 2018, the Defendant demanded the Plaintiff to pay damages for delay in the supply of the instant 14 goods.

F. After clarifying that the instant 14 goods are supplied outside the scope of the instant contract, the Plaintiff requested the payment of the additional goods after completing the supply. However, the Defendant rejected the request, thereby filing the instant lawsuit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 8, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The instant issue was awarded by the Plaintiff and the Defendant on December 19, 2017.

arrow