(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.04.24 2017나9327 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.04.24 2017나9327

물품대금

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. The plaintiff is a corporation that runs the manufacturing and wholesale and retail business of plastics, and the defendant is a corporation that runs the business of assembling buildings, etc.

B. The Defendant was supplied with polychlorates (hereinafter “instant product”) from the Plaintiff, and the amount of the Defendant’s unpaid product as of October 28, 2016 is KRW 2,493,986 (including value-added tax).

C. The Defendant constructed a roof of an access road to an apartment parking lot (hereinafter “instant roof”) using the instant product, but there was a defect that can be filled out on the roof of the instant case after construction (hereinafter “instant defect”).

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

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 2,493,986 as the price for the goods and the delay damages therefor.

B. The defendant's assertion 1) The defendant's assertion that the product of this case exceeds 6 meters is inevitable. Since the length of the product of this case used on the roof of this case exceeds 7.15 meters, the defect of this case was caused by the product of this case, and the plaintiff did not inform the defendant of construction directions while delivering the product of this case. Therefore, the plaintiff is liable for damages equivalent to the cost of repair due to the defect of this case, but the damage exceeds the cost of the product of this case, so the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim for the price of the product of this case. 2) The defendant is unable to respond to the plaintiff's claim for the price of the product of this case. The appraisal result of Gap's appraisal or video, the appraisal of the appraiser of the court of the trial, the result of the appraisal request for the appraiser C of the court of this case, and the result of the inquiry about D (hereinafter "D") of the court of this case's inquiry about the whole purport of the arguments.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2020.10.14 2019나9788

-서울북부지방법원 2020.09.10 2019나37623

-춘천지방법원 2016.01.29 2015나285

-대구지방법원 2019.05.01 2018나4480

-인천지방법원 2019.03.28 2018나183