logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.10.18 2017나2066795
공사대금
Text

1. The judgment of the first instance, including the claim of the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor added at the trial court, shall be modified as follows.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that runs the wholesale and retail business of building materials, the unclaimed construction business, etc., and the Defendant is holding patent technology for waterproof construction works, such as “C” (new technology D) and “E (patent number F), etc. (hereinafter “instant technology”). The Plaintiff is running the manufacturing business of building materials, the wholesale and retail business of building materials, etc.

B. On July 1, 2003, the Plaintiff entered into a new technology use contract with the Defendant, “The Defendant shall grant the Plaintiff the right to use the instant technology, and the Plaintiff shall be granted the right to use the concrete structure waterproof construction in the name of the Defendant, and the Plaintiff shall be granted the right to use the instant concrete structure and execute the construction by using the instant technology.”

(2) The purpose of this Agreement is to permit the Plaintiff to use new technology owned by the Defendant, who is a new technology developer, to use new technology in accordance with the business policies and construction methods set forth by the supplier, and to sell the construction in good faith from July 1, 2003 to June 30, 2004. (1) The term of this Agreement is from July 1, 2003 to June 30, 2004; Presidential Decree No. 22548, Feb. 4, 2004>

arrow