logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.04.26 2016나12784
전기요금 등
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. 기초사실 번호 고객번호 설치장소 설비 신청일 사용량 전기공급일자 공급방식 계약종별 사용용도 05.3493.1636 부동면 내룡리 1 방범용 CCTV 2010.12. 1,270w 2011.1.7. 1상 2선식 공란 15.3004.6172 현동면 눌인리 산155-1(도로) 영상감시시스템 2004.11. 854w 2004.12.27. 1ф 2W 220V 가로등 관공용 15.3004.6207 현서면 사촌리 760(도로) 영상감시시스템 2004.11 854w 2004.12.27. 1ф 2W 220V 가로등 관공용 15.3004.6216 파천면 지경리 499-7(도로) 영상감시시스템 2004.11 854w 2005.1.17. 1ф 2W 220V 가로등 관공용 15.3004.6225 부동면 항리 171-1(도로) 영상감시시스템 2004.11 854w 2005.1.17. 1ф 2W 220V 가로등 관공용 05.3445.8238 현서면 화목리 산41-2 방범용 CCTV 2010.6. 500w 2010.7.8. 1상 2선식 220V 공란

A. In relation to the installation and use of CCTV, etc. in the Defendant’s jurisdiction, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for electrical use (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant after receiving an application for electric use from the Defendant at least six times as indicated in the following table.

B. At the time of the instant contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to calculate the amount of electricity by applying the rate of “aro light” by type of contract, without separately measuring the amount of electricity used, to consider the same quantity as indicated in the “amount of use” column as indicated in the above table (the fixed amount).

C. Under the instant contract, the Plaintiff supplied electricity to the Defendant from the relevant date indicated in the “electric supply date” column of the said table, and thereafter, from that time to December 2, 2015, filed a claim for electric charges applying the street lamps (A) rate according to the said agreement, and the Defendant paid all the electric charges according to the claim amount.

On August 2015, the Plaintiff investigated the CCTV and video monitoring system for the above crime prevention (hereinafter “instant electric power facilities”) on the site and misleads the Defendant into a streetlight to make the type of contract under the terms and conditions of the electricity supply for general use.

arrow