beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. On August 6, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) concluded a contract on the provision of clothes with the Armed Forces Financial Management Body of the Republic of Korea Armed Forces and the Korea Army Academy at Korea in 2015; (b) again, on October 1, 2015 with the Defendant, the Plaintiff entered into a contract on the supply of goods that the Defendant would pay the Plaintiff’s claim to the Defendant in the manner of transferring the Plaintiff’s claim to the Defendant.
The Plaintiff transferred the claim amounting to KRW 43,265,00 to the Defendant on October 26, 2015, and the Defendant received KRW 43,265,000 from the Army Second Operation Headquarters around January 26, 2016.
However, the Defendant delivered defective goods to the Korea Army Academy at Army, thereby failing to perform its obligations, and the Plaintiff supplied the uniform due to the failure to perform its obligations despite repeated demands.
The plaintiff shall revoke the goods supply contract between the plaintiff and the defendant on the ground of the defendant's default and the assignment contract executed in addition thereto.
Therefore, the defendant must return to the plaintiff 43,265,00 won which the defendant received in lieu of the price for the supply of goods.
2. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of pleadings as to Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 12, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, namely, ① a contract for the supply of goods between the plaintiff and the defendant on October 1, 2015 and a contract for the supply of goods between the plaintiff and the defendant on the supply of goods between the plaintiff and the defendant, ② a contract for the supply of goods between the plaintiff and the defendant on the supply of goods appears to have been discarded on October 7, 2015, ③ the plaintiff agreed to the supply of the raw clothes supplied by the Sibro River on January 4, 2016 and the supply of the entire raw clothing to the Sibro Broadcasting Co., Ltd. and the supply of the entire goods again, and the demand for the supply of the goods to the defendant to the Sibro, rather than the defendant.