beta
Text
1. It is based on the judgment of Suwon District Court Decision 2013Kadan16541 Decided December 4, 2013 against the Defendant’s Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On November 4, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for facility purchase of DNA system with the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff agreed to receive KRW 330,00,00 of the daily contract amount as liquidated damages for delay at KRW 3/1,00,00 from the DNA System (hereinafter “Dal System”). The Plaintiff purchased KRW 330,000,00 from the LES TRG TCHCHINY, TESX4670A, and agreed to receive KRW 3/1,00 of the daily contract amount as liquidated damages for delay.
(hereinafter “instant facility purchase contract”). B.
The creditors of DNA system, including the Defendant, etc., obtained the attachment and collection order of the claim against the Plaintiff of the instant case regarding the claim for the purchase price of equipment in the instant case against the Defendant, etc. The creditors of DNA system, including the Defendant, obtained the attachment and collection order of the claim, and the provisional attachment order of the claim. On October 18, 2012, B, Incheon 201574Kadan 35,000,000,000 on August 3, 2012, 2012, the creditor of the instant claim for the purchase price of equipment in the instant case against the Plaintiff of the Defendant, etc., remaining on August 10, 2012, the Defendant, as of the date of service of the creditor’s case number request (won), and the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff on July 1, 2009, as of October 23, 2012.
C. The Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming the amount of KRW 74,823,872 and damages for delay against the Plaintiff as the head of Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch 2013da16541. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff’s claim for the amount of KRW 74,823,872 and damages for delay against the Plaintiff during the said lawsuit was supplied on February 20, 2012. As such, the Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay against the DNA system (33,000,000 x 3/1,000 x 67 days) was due to the Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay. Therefore, the Plaintiff asserted that “the claim for the purchase price for the instant facilities against the Plaintiff in the instant case against the Plaintiff in the aforementioned damages for delay shall be offset against the same amount as the claim for damages for delay.”
3. The above court shall reduce the above liquidated damages by 33,466,50 won, which shall be 50%, and accepted the plaintiff's defense of set-off. The plaintiff on December 4, 2013 shall be 65,53,500 won to the defendant - 33,46,500 won, - 33,46,50 won to December 4, 2013, and shall be annually from May 21, 2013 to December 4, 2013.