logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.09.18 2019나43993
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

Plaintiff’s assertion

On August 17, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to produce and output in KRW 350,000,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”);

8. 20. The same year as the defendant's order

8. 24. Advertising Round completed

Therefore, the defendant should pay 350,000 won to the plaintiff.

Judgment

The burden of proving and proving the completion of a work in a contract for work is against the contractor seeking payment of remuneration for the result of the work. If it is intended to complete a work in a contract for the supply of production, it is insufficient to say that the last process of the original scheduled date ends even the last process of the contract for the supply of production. The main structure of the object is constructed as agreed upon and must have the performance generally required by social norms. In individual cases, the issue of whether the last process of the individual case has complied with must be objectively determined in light of the specific contents of the contract for the supply of production in question and the principle of trust and good faith, and as such, the contractor claiming the payment of remuneration for the production in question must prove and prove that not only the last process stipulated in the contract for the production in question has been completed, but also the major structure of the object has the performance generally required by social norms.

The instant contract constitutes a so-called production supply contract under which the other party agrees to pay the price for the supply of goods made by using the materials owned by the Plaintiff according to the order of the Defendant, who is the contractor. In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Defendant’s obligation to pay the price is naturally acknowledged to objectively recognize that the advertising car, the object of the instant contract, was manufactured in accordance with the terms of the contract.

arrow