(영문) 인천지방법원부천지원 2015.10.29 2015가단6823

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) 인천지방법원부천지원 2015.10.29 2015가단6823

물품대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The following facts may be acknowledged, either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, either in Gap evidence No. 4, Eul evidence No. 1-1, and Eul evidence No. 2:

The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur engaged in the gold criminal production business with the trade name of “B,” and the Defendant is a corporation engaged in the automobile parts manufacturing business, etc.

B. Around February 17, 2014, the payment period is the same year when the Defendant agreed to entrust the Defendant with the production of gold-type development to be supplied to Daesung Electric Co., Ltd.

3. 10. The value of supply was agreed to KRW 65,00,000.

2. Afterwards, the Defendant agreed to commence the production of gold papers by the tenth day of the same month and complete the production by the 17th day of the same month on March 3, 2014.

C. The Plaintiff delivered the gold paper produced on March 17, 2014 to the Defendant. However, the Defendant, on the 18th of the same month following the following day, agreed that the gold paper produced is not inconsistent with the original specifications, and the Plaintiff should complete repair and deliver it to the Plaintiff by the 27th of the same month.

Until the closing date of the argument of this case, the plaintiff has not delivered the penalty completed to the defendant.

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff asserted that, while supplying the gold paper completed to the Defendant on March 17, 2014, the Defendant agreed to pay an amount equivalent to 40% of the supply price as the down payment to the Defendant and deliver it to the Defendant on the 27th day of the same month, the Defendant failed to deliver the gold paper completed repair due to the fact that the Defendant did not pay the down payment, so the Defendant is liable to pay the amount equivalent to the supply price of the gold paper to the Plaintiff.

B. The so-called production supply contract under which one of the judgment parties agrees to supply goods made of his/her own materials according to the order of the other party and the other party agrees to pay the price therefor.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2020.11.17 2019가단16666

-광주지방법원 2015.04.02 2014가합55798

-광주지방법원 2015.10.16 2014가합7164

-대구지방법원서부지원 2016.11.16 2016가단10739

-광주고등법원 2016.06.10 2015나11372