beta
Text
1. At the same time, the Defendant received movable property stated in the separate sheet from the Plaintiff, and at the same time, KRW 9,595,500 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is running a business to produce and sell gold-type and gold-criminal products with the trade name “D” in Daegu-gu C.
B. On December 2014, the Defendant made three gold-type three (13,500,000 won in total) for the singing out and manufacturing of the Hague (hereinafter referred to as the “Hing”) parts to the Plaintiff, and requested the Plaintiff to manufacture the Hing parts (head and hand) in the gold-type.
C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff produced three gold-types listed in paragraph (1) of the attached list of movables (hereinafter “the gold-type”) to the Defendant. From December 7, 2014 to July 23, 2015, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with materials for the Hague production (ABS, Mara, etc.) from the Defendant, and manufactured and supplied the Hague-types to the Defendant.
The Defendant did not pay KRW 7,645,50,00 out of the gold price of this case and KRW 7,645,50 among the Hague parts supplied.
Meanwhile, among the raw materials supplied by the Defendant to the Plaintiff, those remaining in the Plaintiff’s workplace are as stated in attached Table 2.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, or the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 9,595,500,000 to the Plaintiff, along with the delivery of gold-type and remaining Hague parts (each of the items listed in attached Tables 1 and 1 and 2 of the movable property list) owned by the Defendant from the Plaintiff.
B. Unlike the above acknowledged by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff asserts that the sum of the gold price in this case exceeds KRW 15 million and that the Defendant produced and supplied the shower type (3 million won) and the semi-finished products (3707,000 won) of the Hague parts (3,707,000 won), but there is no evidence to acknowledge this.
C. Meanwhile, unlike the recognition above, the Defendant reached approximately 1,300 g of ABS and approximately 10,000 of the air carrier, unlike the Hague component materials to be returned from the Plaintiff.