beta
Text
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
The plaintiff's goods contract against the defendant on September 29, 2014.
Reasons
Basic Facts
The court's explanation on this part is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Plaintiff’s assertion
For the following reasons, the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff the amount of 557,990,00 won under the contract in this case as damages for default or tort, or at least to pay damages for delay incurred by the plaintiff due to the negligence in concluding the contract in accordance with Article 535 of the Civil Act, or at least to pay 536,752,791 won and damages for delay incurred by the plaintiff in performing the contract in this case.
However, as the Plaintiff’s damage claim against the Defendant, if set off against the Defendant’s claim for refund of advance payment amounting to KRW 390,593,00,00 against the Plaintiff, there is no obligation to refund advance payment against the Defendant (the Plaintiff asserts that “the Defendant is liable to compensate for the damages as above, and there is no obligation to return advance payment within the said scope,” with respect to the cause of the claim for confirmation of the non-existence of the obligation to return advance payment, it is the purport of seeking a set-off. Accordingly, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the amount of the goods unpaid and the delay damages therefrom.
In order to replace the products of this case and the existing equipment operated by the Navy and the Korea Coast Guard, the protocol of the existing equipment must be known, but it was impossible for the plaintiff to find it known because the protocol of the existing equipment was encrypted.
Accordingly, even though the original defendant agreed to revise the content of the instant contract or specify the method of performing the instant contract by replacing the protocol of the existing equipment through each joint conference on May 21, 2015 and September 3, 2015, the original defendant, through each joint conference on September 21, 2015, agreed to change the contents of the instant contract or specify the method of performing the instant contract, the above agreement shall be reversed and the existing equipment shall be equipment.