(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.01.19 2014가단5259362

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.01.19 2014가단5259362

청구이의

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. On August 5, 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract for the manufacture and supply of the following goods (hereinafter referred to as the “instant goods supply contract”) with respect to the supply of the instant automatic control system, which is located in the order center, from the Hanjin-do road expansion project tunnel, the order center is Jeonnam-do.

- The delivery date of sound - 60,500,000 won (including additional dues): the delivery place on October 28, 2013 (the place where part may be changed according to the field circumstances): the designated place (the central surveillance room of bamboo and bamboo tunnels): the goods supplied (construction) and the trial run, and the price shall be paid at the end of each month.

B. The Defendant filed a payment order against KCK to claim the price under the instant goods supply contract with the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014 tea8937, and the obligor paid 60,500,000 won to the obligee and damages for delay. The payment order (hereinafter in this case, the instant payment order) was issued to the obligee, and the above payment order was finalized on May 17, 2014.

C. On April 21, 2015, the case electronics was decided to commence rehabilitation procedures by the Gwangju District Court 2015 Mahap5003, and the Plaintiff was appointed as the manager of the case electronics.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 12, Eul evidence 1 to 6-5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant: (a) supplied and completed installation of lighting automatic control system parts under the instant goods supply contract; and (b) received the instant payment order without all delivery and installation of optical consortiums and non-spool parts among the parts after trial operation; (c) thus, the instant payment order should not be subject to compulsory execution based on the instant payment order.

B. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the payment order is issued on the ground that the claim which became the cause of the claim for the payment order was not established or invalidated before the issuance of the payment order.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.03.03 2013가단5195720

-수원지방법원 2017.09.06 2016가단13105

-서울남부지방법원 2017.08.31 2017가단208977

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.02.16 2015가단93786 (1)

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.27 2016가단5015818