beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 117,230,50 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from April 13, 2017 to August 10, 2017.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in manufacturing business of medical devices, etc. with the trade name B, and the Defendant is a corporation with the purpose of manufacturing and wholesale and retailing medical devices, etc.
B. From December 9, 2016 to April 12, 2017, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with dental appliances equivalent to KRW 287,230,500, and received KRW 170,000, out of the amount of the goods.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 28, 2 and 3, and purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remaining amount of KRW 117,230,500 (=287,230,500-170,000) and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 15% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from April 13, 2017 to August 10, 2017, the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case, from April 10, 2017, which is the day following the date of the final supply of the goods sought by the Plaintiff.
B. The Defendant’s assertion and its determination 1) asserted that the Plaintiff arbitrarily released the product unit price. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff claims the price of the instant product by arbitrarily allocating the product unit price of KRW 500 per unit to KRW 500 per unit. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the above evidence No. 4-1 and No. 2, the Plaintiff prepared and submitted a list of products to the Defendant on December 2, 2016, with the size of KRW 5,000 (including additional tax), and KRW 6,000 per unit (including additional tax) of the product with the size of KRW 14 mnives to supply the product unit price of KRW 500 per unit. However, the Plaintiff’s offering the product unit price of KRW 500 per unit price to the Defendant around March 23, 2017, which did not generate any profit. In addition, it is recognized that the Plaintiff agreed to offer rebates to the Defendant.