logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.04.26 2018가합523032
약정금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is a corporation whose purpose is multimodal transport mediation business, shipping brokerage business, and agent business, and the defendant is a person who operates D Co., Ltd. imported and sold in Italian cleaning machine in Korea.

B. On August 27, 2015, the Plaintiff’s model title of the Itaria C Syp cleaning team to the Defendant:

E. hereinafter “instant cleaning machine”

(C) The Plaintiff paid KRW 217,413,00 as the import price. C. The Defendant requested the Plaintiff to import the cleaning machine of Italian in the instant case and transferred the price received from the Plaintiff to the warehouse designated by the Plaintiff. The Defendant imported the cleaning machine of this case from the aforementioned manufacturing to transfer it to the Plaintiff, and from March 2016, the Plaintiff kept the cleaning machine of this case kept and managed by the Plaintiff. D. On January 11, 2017, the Plaintiff demanded the Plaintiff to pay KRW 271,348,060 to the Defendant on August 28, 2015 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. The Defendant paid KRW 31,00,000 to the Plaintiff on March 29, 2017, and the Defendant paid KRW 30,3030,000 to the Plaintiff on April 28, 2017, including the purport of each evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 101, and 101 each of the pleadings number.

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to import and sell the cleaning machine in spring in 2015, while the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff the expenses incurred by the Plaintiff and the sales proceeds in preference to the expenses incurred by the Plaintiff and divide the other profits into half (hereinafter “Agreement on the Distribution of Profits”).

(2) Accordingly, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, on February 25, 2016, concluded that the Plaintiff shall pay the Plaintiff the principal invested by July 2016, and that the Plaintiff shall pay the Plaintiff the principal of the cleaning machine (hereinafter referred to as “profit”).

arrow