logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원논산지원 2016.04.27 2015가합304
물품대금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 124,629,99 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from September 15, 2015 to April 27, 2016.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that manufactures and distributes medical devices, and the Defendant is a business entity that has operated the sales business of medical devices under the trade name “B.”

Article 3 (Goods and Delivery Methods) (A) In order to produce and deliver raw materials smoothly after receiving supply and demand, A and B shall place an order in writing at least 12 days and confirm it by wire, and B shall be supplied without delay within 15 days from the date of receiving the order.

-Article VI (Termination of Contract) A is subject to termination immediately when it violates Article 4, and the supply may be immediately suspended without any separate notice, and subsequent damage (stock) caused by Party A’s failure to comply with it shall be paid, liable and compensated by Party A on the basis of the delivery price.

(C) In a case where Party A becomes a ground for termination of the contract due to the breach of the contract or the termination of the contract, Party A’s own brand products shall grasp the products, inventories, raw materials, etc. in its custody in advance (three months) so as not to cause damage to Party B.

B. On July 31, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a commodity supply contract with the Defendant to supply medical devices indicating the Defendant’s own trademark (hereinafter “instant contract”).

The provisions relating to this case in the contract are as follows:

(A) The defendant, while Eul refers to the plaintiff).

The Plaintiff supplied the goods as ordered by the Defendant by June 30, 2014. However, on July 11, 2014, the Plaintiff expressed that the Defendant could not supply the goods to the Defendant until the payment of the unpaid goods is made for the amount ordered on July 10, 2014 and July 14, 2014.

On July 15, 2014, the defendant brought about the goods attached to the defendant's own trademark to the plaintiff, which means that the defendant distributes them to the outside.

arrow