logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2020.11.26 2018가단57783
물품대금 반환 등
Text

All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff A is a person who engages in wholesale and retail business, such as automation machinery, with the trade name of “D”. The Plaintiff Company is a company that aims at wholesale and retail business of livestock products, and the Defendant is a person who manufactures meat processing machinery in the trade name of “E”.

B. On July 10, 2017, Plaintiff Company entered into a contract with Plaintiff A to purchase six machinery, including SR-300 (hereinafter “instant machinery”) on August 10, 2017 on the delivery date, and Plaintiff A entered into a contract to purchase three machinery, including the instant machinery, from the Defendant on August 7, 2017.

C. Around August 10, 2017, the Defendant installed the instant machinery at the Plaintiff Company’s factory in accordance with each of the above contracts.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The main point of the plaintiffs' assertion is that the machinery of this case, unlike the contents explained by the defendant, sets saws easily, cut soup cannot be cut, and there is a serious defect to adjust Hand and operate the machinery of this case as a person with no skilled experience.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff A cancelled the sales contract concluded with the Defendant on the ground of incomplete performance or warranty liability by the delivery of the complaint of this case, and demanded the return of KRW 47,00,000,000 corresponding to the price. The Plaintiff Company, through the Plaintiff, incurred damages of KRW 715,00,000 due to defects in the machinery of this case, and KRW 1,435,00,000, which were not properly engaged in work due to defects in the machinery of this case, and thus, sought compensation to the Defendant pursuant to Article 750 of the Civil Act.

(b) In order to cancel a contract on the grounds of default on the contractual basis of a determination, the obligee is not obliged to perform the contract in question in order to achieve the purpose of the contract, and the contract is not achieved if the obligation is not fulfilled.

arrow