beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s decision of performance recommendation against the Plaintiff on April 9, 2016 in the damages claim No. 2016Gauri4349, supra.
Reasons
1. It is sufficiently recognized that the Plaintiff supplied to the Defendant on August 7, 2015 that there was a defect in contact based on the Plaintiff’s cause attributable to the Plaintiff.
2. The Defendant’s primary amount of damages incurred to the Defendant as a result of the Defendant’s use until August 12, 2015, which was unaware of the defect in the contact with the contact, is KRW 7,802,630, and the Plaintiff is fully liable for the damages.
3. The Plaintiff’s return of defective contact points was returned to the Defendant again, and the Defendant did not verify whether the defect of the contact points was removed. The second damage amount arising from the Defendant’s use of the contact points was KRW 10,569,170 on August 18, 2015, and the Plaintiff’s contribution negligence on the occurrence of the damage seems to exceed 70%.
4. Therefore, the scope of the Plaintiff’s compensation out of the amount of secondary damage (i.e., KRW 10,569,170 x 70/100).
5. The Defendant’s repair work made it possible to reuse an amount equivalent to KRW 4,622,970, out of KRW 18,376,371,80, which is equivalent to KRW 776, 472,970, and the remainder of the defective contamination was discarded, and KRW 119,850, which was the cost of disposal during the process of disposal.
6. Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay to the Defendant the sum of KRW 10,697,929 (i.e., the first damage KRW 7,802,630, the second damage of KRW 7,398,419, the waste disposal cost of KRW 119,850 - the reusable amount of KRW 4,622,970) and damages for delay.
7. If so, the decision of performance recommendation as stated in Paragraph (1) of the Disposition ordering the Plaintiff to pay damages for delay and damages for delay thereof is unfair within the extent exceeding the amount recognized in Paragraph (6). Thus, the execution recommendation decision as to the unfair portion is excluded from the enforcement force of the above decision of performance recommendation.