logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.11.03 2014가단207492
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 42,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from November 21, 2014 to November 3, 2015.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 30, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into an agency contract with Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant”) under which goods, such as shampoo and rinse, are supplied by the Defendant, and sold them.

C worked as the head of the business division in charge of the defendant's agency, and was in charge of supplying goods to the plaintiff from June 30, 2010.

B. The ex-factory price of goods supplied by the Plaintiff from the Defendant is ordinarily lower than the actual ex-factory price of large retailer.

Therefore, the defendant allowed the business members to discount the ex-factory price within 30% or to supply free of charge goods equivalent to the discounted price for 3 months after concluding a new agency contract.

C. From July 2010 to October 2010, the Plaintiff was supplied in KRW 477,065,355 at the ex-factory price of KRW 584,246,39 for three months from July 201 to October 201.

The Plaintiff demanded C to set the supply price of the above goods at KRW 270,349,798, but C provided only the goods equivalent to KRW 85,201,369.

The Plaintiff supplied goods equivalent to KRW 1,358,652,602 at a price discounted by approximately 17% from the Defendant from November 201 to September 2011, 201, which were three months after the conclusion of an agency contract, to KRW 1,358,652,60, and was additionally provided with goods equivalent to KRW 101,547,323.

On October 201, the Plaintiff claimed that C had the difference between the ex-factory price of the goods that had been supplied to C and the ex-factory price of a large retailer, and demanded C to additionally preserve the goods equivalent to the above amount. On October 25, 2011, the Plaintiff received each of the following written non-performance notes (hereinafter “instant performance note”) and the Defendant’s certificate of personal seal impression:

Amount: 44,366,728 above amount was incurred in commercial transactions between Defendant C and Plaintiff D and the Company.

arrow