logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.11.27 2013가합525538
물품대금
Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Items such as the conclusion of the instant contract: (a) the volume of the divided supply of naval power headquarters of the demanding administrative agency; (b) unit 2.000; (c) unit 2.00; (d) the term of delivery for the installation of the site for delivery of the delivery of the goods under the contract, and the place of delivery; and (d) the place of delivery for the second unit contract of the Marine Corps in Kimpo-si; (c) 873,153,840 won (87,315,390 won) for the Marine Corps (87,315,390 won); and (d) 0.150%/1 of the contract amount for liquidated damages; and (e) the purchase of goods (manufacture) the general terms and conditions of the purchase of goods (manufacturing); and (e) the purchase of goods (manufacturing of goods); and (e) additional special conditions of the purchase of goods (Article 1) the Plaintiff “the goods in question” (hereinafter referred to as the “instant goods”).

(2) On July 6, 2012, the Defendant and the Defendant enter into a purchase contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the terms and conditions as indicated below, as follows: (a) bid bid (No. 201206-2197-00 of the Notice of the Public Notice of the Republic of Korea’s Public Notice of the Public Notice of the Public Notice of the Government Procurement Service) is awarded

(2) The goods of this case are equipment for the establishment of a dynamic monitoring system to transmit images taken during the movement of four wheeled vehicle vehicles with high performance video monitoring equipment to the regional control office, and the main components of the goods of this case are written on the "Wol-top item (dynamic monitoring system) purchase specifications (the main components of the goods of this case in the form of purchase specifications)" presented by the Maritime Headquarters.

B. After the conclusion of the instant contract, the Plaintiff raised an objection to the period, place, and method of the delivery of the instant contract to the Navy. Accordingly, the Navy headquarters shall hold consultations with the Plaintiff five times from July 2012 to September 2012, and upon the Plaintiff’s request for a test and evaluation of the instant product in writing after having produced the instant product with specific performance required in the purchase specifications, the Maritime Headquarters shall be present in the presence of the Plaintiff.

arrow