logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.01.25 2016나23199
매매대금
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. Basic facts

A. On January 2, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant, who operates a singing practice room, to set up an outdoor PED electronic sign board for publicity at KRW 1.9 million (hereinafter “instant installation contract”).

B. After that, on January 7, 2016, pursuant to the instant installation agreement, the Plaintiff: (a) installed an electronic sign board with a width of 260 cm; (b) 90 cm; and (c) 3 luminous size (hereinafter “instant electronic sign board”); (c) received KRW 1 million from his wife C with the Defendant’s delegation; and (d) drafted an installation agreement with the content that KRW 900,000 for the remainder payment should be paid on January 11, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the parties’ assertion (1) The Plaintiff installed the instant electronic display board in accordance with the instant installation agreement, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder amount of KRW 900,000,000 and its delay damages to the Plaintiff.

(2) The Plaintiff agreed to install the instant electronic display board with the size of 290 cm wide, 90 cm high, and grass size (7 Color), but installed the instant electronic display board not in compliance with the above specifications. Thus, the Defendant cannot comply with the Plaintiff’s request.

B. The following circumstances are: (a) the Defendant sought the estimation of the three-dimensional electronic sign boards to the Plaintiff on December 30, 2015, which was prior to the conclusion of the instant installation contract; (b) the Plaintiff recommended the Defendant to install three-dimensional electronic sign boards; (c) on January 8, 2016, immediately after the installation of the instant electronic sign board, the Defendant confirmed the Plaintiff on January 8, 2016, whether the said electronic sign board can be adjusted according to the Defendant’s wife’s wife’s wishes; and (c) the electronic sign board of three-dimensional specifications and unfolding specifications.

arrow