beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: (a) the part on the 6th end of the judgment of the first instance is as follows; (b) the part on the 6th part of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows; (c) the part on the 8th part and the 3th part following the 15th part; (c) the part on the 13th part and the 17th part following the 13th 17th part; and (d) the part on the 2nd part are as follows; and (c) the part on 13th 17th 17th part
2. Additional parts
A. The part 6th part of the judgment of the court of first instance (A) of the 6th 12th part of the 6th 12th 12th (A) (the above certificate of completion of supply is issued by the plaintiff to Joppbls Korea, and the construction of a pair of goods between the defendant and the ordering office was not completed unless the final approval of the defendant and the ordering office is completed. Thus, the above defendant's obligation to pay the remaining goods does not yet become due. However, as seen earlier, the above certificate of completion of supply is issued by the employees of Tran Construction, which is the ordering office, and the above certificate of acceptance was received from the defendant's employees after driving the freezing of the instant freezing, in light of the fact that the above certificate of completion of delivery was received from the defendant's employees, it is reasonable to view that with respect to the supply and trial operation of the instant freezing machine, the plaintiff was approved by the defendant or Tchip Construction, and the plaintiff's delivery of the instant freezing machine was completed.
B. On the third third part of the judgment of the court of first instance, the defendant does not apply the main text where the contract of this case is acknowledged as having set the date of payment on an equal status under subparagraph 1 of Article 13 (1) of the Subcontract Act, which is the ground for starting the starting point of damages for delay.