beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 75,261,438 as well as 20% per annum from May 1, 2014 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Around March 1, 2011, the Defendant entered into a contract for the supply of products with the Japanese Samsung Co., Ltd. (a three-dimensionalized stock company; hereinafter “three-dimensionally established company”) to sell television or computer monitors products, etc.
The defendant made an agreement as follows with regard to the inspection of the goods supplied and the return of the goods that failed to pass the contract at the time of the above contract:
- The isolation shall be inspected promptly after receipt of the product, and shall be notified to the defendant where the failure is found.
The method of inspection, standards for passing and failure to pass an inspection, matters concerning inspections, etc. shall be determined by the isolation.
The inspection of vertical compatibility shall be delegated to the customer of vertical compatibility.
(Article 5 (2) of the Sales Contract with the Defendant) - When the degree of inferior among the rejected goods is minor and it is possible to use them by the effort of the isolation, it may be accepted on the condition of a reduction in the price.
On the other hand, if the defendant is notified of the return of the goods which failed to pass the separation, the defendant shall immediately take over the goods and the expenses incurred in taking over the goods shall be borne by
(Article 6(2) and (4)(b) of the above sales contract.
Around October 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract for processing (hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract”) under which the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with pressurized raw materials to the Plaintiff in order to create a product to be sold in Samgrified, and the Defendant again entered into a contract for processing (hereinafter referred to as “the instant contract”) under which the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with the outer processing stamp processing (hereinafter referred to as “the primary processing Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with the outer processing stamp processing, the Defendant added it thereto, and added it to the pressur processing, and the Defendant supplied the pressur processing (hereinafter referred to as “the instant processing”).
However, the contract of this case is not prepared.