(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2017.01.12 2015가단21268

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2017.01.12 2015가단21268

약정금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 7,842,185 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from November 18, 2015 to January 12, 2017.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 29, 2015, the Defendant entered into an agreement on the manufacture of the said machinery (hereinafter referred to as the “instant agreement”) with the Plaintiff on April 29, 2015, when the Defendant, based on the drawings made by C, made up of pelpel pellets machines and pelpeltos and pelpeltos, in which the tree would be put in a pelpeltos, automatically entering a pelpeltos (which would be used as alternative fuels as compresseding the tree). The main contents of the agreement are as follows.

1) In manufacturing the instant machinery, the Defendant (explosion) pays the Plaintiff the manufacturing drawings and raw materials cost to the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff) in cash. 2) The Plaintiff manufactures two of the instant machinery and supplies them under an agreement with the Defendant until the test operation is conducted.

3) The Plaintiff completed the instant mechanical operation up to May 15, 2015 and supplied the Defendant with the instant mechanical equipment up to May 15, 2015. 4) The Plaintiff confirmed the name of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and paid KRW 5,00,000,000 from the Defendant to the test operation up to May 15, 2015.

B. The Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 3,00,000 for the mechanical drawing written by C in accordance with the instant agreement, the processing cost proposed by C, and KRW 5,00,00 for the said manufacturing cost. The Plaintiff manufactured the instant machinery in accordance with the instant agreement.

Accordingly, the plaintiff and the defendant operated the machinery of this case around May 20, 2015, but did not work normally.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including the number of each branch), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff had failed to drive the above trial and produced and supplied the samples and finished products of the machinery of this case, which the plaintiff directly designed the drawing between the defendant and the defendant, and the defendant agreed to settle the cost. In accordance with the agreement of this case and the above additional agreement, the following costs shall be borne.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2017.11.03 2017나302316

-대구지방법원 2017.05.25 2016나11170

-수원지방법원안산지원 2016.03.09 2015가단104176

-대구지방법원경주지원 2019.11.13 2018가단3192

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.02.10 2014노3702