logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.06.30 2015가단2163
물품대금 등
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 74,530,015 as well as 20% per annum from February 6, 2015 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that engages in automobile parts manufacturing business in its trade name, and the Defendant is a company that engages in automobile parts business, etc.

B. Around November 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract with Hyundai Industries Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Mogi Industries”) to supply crypt products (hereinafter “instant products”) and supplied them to Hyundai Industries from November 26, 2013.

C. The Plaintiff manufactured and supplied the instant product to the Defendant from February 2014 to July 2014.

The Defendant paid KRW 20,00,000,000 to the Plaintiff on May 15, 2014, and KRW 20,000,00 on May 30, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Gap evidence 3, 7, Gap evidence 5-1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. (1) The Plaintiff paid KRW 114,530,015 for the manufacture and delivery of the instant product, and the Defendant agreed to pay the amount.

See The Defendant agreed to temporarily set the unit price of the instant product between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and agreed to set the unit price between the Defendant and the Hyundai Industries on the basis thereof.

The price of the instant product is KRW 39,688,156 (based on the unit price set in C) or KRW 56,880,020 (based on the unit price set in D) when calculating the unit price.

B. We examine whether the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to calculate the price of the instant product based on the Plaintiff’s assertion, whether the cost incurred by the Plaintiff, and the unit price of the product based on the Defendant’s assertion.

The following circumstances are determined by comprehensively taking account of the aforementioned evidence and the evidence No. 2-1, No. 2, No. 1, No. 6, 8, No. 2-1, No. 2, No. 7-1 through No. 7, and No. 9-1 through No. 4, and the overall purport of the pleadings, namely, the defendant enter into a contract for the supply of the instant products with Hyundai Industries.

arrow