logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2016.08.12 2015가합102128
물품대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant Company’s relationship are manufacturing business of semiconductors, equipment assembly, etc. with the trade name of C, and the Defendant is a company that mainly manufactures automobile parts and manufactures consortiums.

B. On December 10, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into the first contract for the supply of KM SUB LINE and paid the price for the goods (1) the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant on December 10, 2014 with the Defendant, and entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to pay the Plaintiff KRW 450 million (hereinafter referred to as “instant goods”) value-added tax (hereinafter referred to as “the instant contract”). The Plaintiff entered into a separate contract with the Plaintiff on April 10, 2015 with the place designated by the Defendant for the Mexico to be installed in the Mexico factory of the Mexico Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “HUB LINE”) by April 10, 2015.

(2) On December 31, 2014, the Defendant issued electronic bills of KRW 148,50,000,000,000,000 for electronic bills of KRW 14,850,000 on March 13, 2015, electronic bills of KRW 4,9,50,000 on April 8, 2015, and delivered electronic bills of KRW 14,8,50,000 on April 30, 2015 to the Plaintiff, respectively. Around that time, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 495,00,000 (the sum of value-added taxes in KRW 45,50,00,00,00 for the price for the instant goods under the instant first contract).

C. (1) The Plaintiff was unable to install an OLT product by February 10, 2015, which is the date on which the establishment of the goods for OLT under the first contract of the instant case was completed. Accordingly, on May 10, 2015, the Defendant agreed with the KOT Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the instant goods”) on the date of shipment of the instant goods, in consultation with the Plaintiff in order to avoid anticipated disadvantages, such as the suspension of trading, etc., if the instant goods are not shipped out, under the agreement with the Plaintiff.

arrow