logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.06.13 2016가단309417
보증금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff is a person who engages in the business of selling medical appliances in the name of “C”, and the Defendant is a person who engages in the wholesale and retail business of medical appliances consumed in the name of “D,” and E is a person who has worked as a business director of “D” from September 2013 to August 2015.

The Plaintiff remitted the total of KRW 40,000,000 on September 12, 2014 to Defendant E’s account, and KRW 40,000,000 on September 15, 201.

1. A shall sell Party A’s products and other goods at the price determined by Party A in accordance with Party B’s order, and Party B shall pay the price in cash within one week from the date of receipt of the products and other goods, and bank notes or checks may also be held: Provided, That if the price is not paid on the date designated by Party A (including closure of business and non-payment) it shall lose the benefit of time and the ownership of Party A’s products and other goods shall be held for Party A until the full payment is made.

2. Eul shall deposit 40,00,000 won per day with the transaction deposit, and if the account receivables meet more than the transaction deposit, it shall be deposited additionally at the request of Gap, and it shall be deemed that there is no interest on the transaction deposit.

4. Where Party A pays the credit sales under a prior agreement with Party B according to the terms and conditions of collection, the sales shall be made according to the following terms and conditions of collection:

5. In principle, a person to be sold shall make monthly payments, but may be combined for a quarter or month by mutual convenience; and

6. B shall immediately cease the supply of a product to B when selling a product at or below the price designated by Party A, or when violating any other arrangement, and Party A may take a voluntary measure.

On September 16, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a trade agreement with E referred to as the Defendant’s agent with the following contents:

(A) The fact that the Defendant and B refers to the Plaintiff; hereinafter referred to as the “instant arrangement”). [The grounds for recognition] does not dispute, and Party A.

arrow