logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원부천지원 2020.01.15 2019가합101891
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that manufactures, processes, or sells food, and the Defendant is a company that manufactures and sells food processing machinery.

B. On August 29, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to install and sell the glass, such as glass, in a factory located in Sinju-si (hereinafter “instant factory”), with a producer of glass, etc., for manufacturing and selling the glass, “the rice as main raw material and glass glass glass glass glasss glass glass glass glass glass as indicated below (including value-added tax) (hereinafter “instant contract”).

C. On November 6, 2013, the Plaintiff, via the Small and Medium Business Corporation, paid KRW 180,000,000 to the Defendant, and the Defendant, around April 2014, installed a saice producer at the factory of this case.

On May 12, 2014, the Small and Medium Business Corporation confirmed that a producer equivalent to KRW 535 million (value-added tax separate) has been established in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract (the base rate of 89.20%) after examining the origin of the producer of the ice supplied and installed by the Defendant.

E. On May 20, 2014, the Defendant and the Plaintiff agreed to return two anti-satis 2, four plastic season 4, and one emission contact 1, from among those who produce satis, on the ground of “products unsuitable to the product” and drafted a “contract modification agreement” in which the price is 535 million won (excluding value-added tax).

Since then, the Plaintiff purchased the plastic flag on its own in China, and installed it on the remaining producers who supplied and installed by the Defendant (hereinafter “production facility of this case”).

F. Upon the Plaintiff’s request, the Small and Medium Business Corporation paid the remainder of KRW 3550 million to the Defendant on June 10, 2014.

사. 원고는 2014. 8. 7.부터 2015. 1. 31.까지 22회에 걸쳐 이 사건 생산시설을 시운전하였으나 건조기의 수분조절 능력 부족으로 열풍로스터에서 퍼핑[puffing, 팽화(膨化)]이 되지 않거나 코팅기에서 제품이...

arrow