logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.07.13 2017나74474
기술지원비용 지급
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

Reasons

The Defendant’s grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance except for the part on the Defendant’s assertion of “2. Additional Determination” as follows, and the fact-finding and judgment in the court of first instance are deemed legitimate in light of the evidence submitted by the court of first instance. This court’s grounds for appeal citing the following “2. Additional Determination” are the same as the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus,

In addition, the Defendant accepted the Defendant’s demand for the reduction of royalties from July 201 to the Plaintiff on the ground of the decline in sales, and without any particular objection, calculated royalties by the method of settling the difference between the goods sold to the Plaintiff and the goods sold by applying the Defendant’s unit price as requested by the Defendant. Therefore, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the claim for royalties based on the unit price

However, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to reduce royalties as stipulated in the instant contract after the conclusion of the instant contract, although there is no dispute between the parties, the evidence No. 5 (Materials for Settlement) is a document unilaterally prepared by the Defendant after the conclusion of the instant contract, and it is difficult to believe that the document was written by the Defendant, and otherwise, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed on the reduction of royalties.

There is no evidence to prove that the settlement of the royalties claim has been completed by offsetting the Defendant’s claim for goods price and the Plaintiff’s claim for royalties.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

The plaintiff's claim shall be accepted for the reason that the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow