logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.16 2013가합67919
선급금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 16, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply of solar container wafers for solar batteries 1) The Plaintiff is a smartis company on May 16, 2008 (hereinafter “ smartis”).

(2) As between the Parties, the amount of annual supply and unit price shall be determined in advance and shall be from Smart Ros for six years from 2009 to 2014, to the end of six years from the date of 2009 to the date of 2014.

(3) A contract under which the sum total of KRW 111,468,000 is equivalent to the sum total of KRW 19.2 million (hereinafter “instant supply contract”).

A) The supply year 2009 2010 201 2012 2013 2013 2013 6.30.6.90 5.73 5.205 1.20,000 3.66 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million c.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million 3.6 million . according to the instant supply contract, the unit price adjustment can be adjusted once a year through mutual agreement in consideration of market conditions.

The scope of adjustment shall not exceed 【5% of the contract unit price for the relevant year

(Article 2 Section 1). The buyer shall pay to the supplier in three installments, not later than December 15, 2008, the pre-paid US$ 11.1 million.

(Article III(1)(2)(C)(A)(2)(S)(and waferer’s supply shall be claimed as the supply price after deducting advance payment per head specified in Article III(3)(the amount equivalent to 10% of the contractual unit price) from the contractual unit price for the corresponding year from the amount of supply.

(Article 3(4)) The provisions of each subparagraph are defined.

3) On July 2, 2009, ELPion Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ELP”) from Smart Epis (hereinafter “ELP”)

The supply contract of this case was established by division and comprehensive succession of the status under the supply contract of this case, and thereafter the trade name of ELE was the defendant (hereinafter referred to as "the defendant") without distinction between ELE and ELE and the defendant before division.

B. A partial amendment to the instant supply contract was made. The solar batteries industry began to grow rapidly from around 2006 to around 2008. At the same time, the solar batteries manufacturers are the raw materials of solar batteries.

arrow