(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.10.07 2014나18916

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.10.07 2014나18916

계약금반환

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 10, 2009, the company Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) concluded a contract with the Plaintiff on May 21, 2009, setting the construction cost of the reconstruction of the road weather information system from May 21, 2009 to August 10, 2009 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. On May 8, 2009, the Plaintiff issued a subcontract (hereinafter “instant subcontract”) to the Defendant operating “B” by setting the price of KRW 120 million for the re-construction of the said road weather information system from May 8, 2009 to August 10, 2009, and paid KRW 25 million as the down payment on June 9, 2009.

C. On August 10, 2009, the instant company expressed its intent to cancel the instant contract on the grounds that the re-construction of the road weather information system was not completed.

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

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant subcontract is the so-called blanket subcontract, the Defendant is responsible, and the Plaintiff was unable to complete the construction work of the road weather information system by August 10, 2009, and the Plaintiff was notified of the cancellation of the contract by the instant company. The Plaintiff is obligated to cancel the instant subcontract on the grounds of the Defendant’s nonperformance. The Defendant is obligated to return the down payment of the instant subcontract. (2) The instant subcontract is a partial subcontract for the purpose of the development of the software, and the Defendant completed the development of the software, but the Plaintiff failed to perform its duty of installation due to its fault, etc., and was terminated by the instant company

B. Fact that there is no dispute over the contents of the instant subcontract, and the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings in each statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 5:

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2017.04.19 2015나2017843

-대구고등법원 2016.02.03 2014나20128

-서울남부지방법원 2018.04.03 2017가단234594

-수원지방법원안양지원 2012.11.15 2011가단4504

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.16 2015가합5076