(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.05.12 2016나5588

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) 서울북부지방법원 2017.05.12 2016나5588

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 16, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, who is a low temperature cooling machine manufacturing and repair business operator, visited the show cases in D in the Namyang-si, Namyang-si operated by C to purchase the static field show cases installed in the static area which he operated.

B. At this place, the Plaintiff: (a) assessed the show cases he wanted; (b) reversed the choice on the next day; and (c) the Defendant finally selected the show cases at the Plaintiff’s static point.

On the other hand, the defendant installed the said shock cases together with the air conditioners.

(hereinafter the above shock cases and parts are “the shock cases of this case.”

The Defendant claimed KRW 4,370,000 for the supply of the shock case of this case to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff, on October 16, 2014, remitted to the Defendant KRW 3.5 million and KRW 3.55 million on October 31, 2014, respectively, and the Defendant remitted KRW 2.6 million among them to C on October 16, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 1 and 3

2. The party's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff's assertion that he purchased and installed an outdoor machine separately while installing the show case of this case. The show case of this case did not work properly due to the breakdown of the open air supplied by the defendant or the compliance press, which is the core part thereof. Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the repair cost of the plaintiff to repair the show case of this case, KRW 5,00,000,000,000,000 won, and KRW 9,33,000,000,000 won, which are paid by the plaintiff to repair the show case of this case. 2) The defendant's assertion that the show case of this case did not work in the open air is not the reason why the plaintiff did not work in the show pipe of this case. It is because the plaintiff's direct choice of the show pipe of this case.

In addition, the above phenomenon is frequently generated in the medium shock case products, and the cost of KRW 5,00 is at least 5,00.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2018.09.11 2017가단228841

-인천지방법원 2020.10.22 2019나70523

-광주지방법원 2016.02.18 2015가단46251

-서울북부지방법원 2015.01.30 2013나21411

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.29 2019가단5250049