(영문) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2018.12.18 2017나32364

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) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2018.12.18 2017나32364

기타(금전)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim that the court changed in exchange is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff’s total costs of litigation.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 3, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply of goods (hereinafter referred to as “instant supply contract”) with Dwork to supply Lithium ion batteries 22 (the supply term of the Plaintiff and Dwork changed from May 10, 2016 to June 20, 2016) with Dwork’s contract amounting to 406,270,495 won, and from February 17, 2016 to June 20, 2016 (the Plaintiff and Dwork changed the supply term to June 20, 2016).

B. On March 2, 2016, for the purpose of the supply of goods under the instant supply contract, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the supply of the goods (i.e., the supply period) from April 30, 2016 to June 20, 2016, with the amount of 13 Lithium temperature storage batteries totaling KRW 240,068,929 (the part on the demand for the Seoul regional headquarters) and Lithium temperature storage batteries totaling KRW 166,201,56 (the part on demand for the Seoul regional headquarters), totaling KRW 406,270,495 won (i.e., KRW 240,068, KRW 929, KRW 16,201,566), but the supply place was the place designated by D Corporation (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the instant supply contract”).

C. On March 2, 2016, the Plaintiff concluded a contract with the Defendant for the supply of goods to the Defendant, and on March 2, 2016, transferred KRW 406,270,495 to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract for the transfer of goods”) and notified the Defendant of the said assignment of goods to D Corporation.

1) Meanwhile, on March 2, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract for the supply of goods in the same form as the instant goods supply contract (Evidence A7, hereinafter “instant contract”).

The contract of this case was prepared separately. The content of the contract of this case is the same as the contract of this case for the supply of the second goods (hereinafter referred to as the "contract of this case between the plaintiff and the defendant entered into under the contract of this case") except that the contract of this case is written as "35,00,000 won" as the total contract price of this case.

(2) The instant case.

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2017.11.15 2017가단30664

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2015.02.06 2014고합153

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.01.20 2019가단27176

-대구지방법원의성지원 2020.02.05 2019가단755

-부산지방법원 2019.11.15 2019나2824