logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.11.11 2015나2032316
손해배상(기)
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

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

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing the reasoning of the judgment is as stated in the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the plaintiffs' additional arguments and their judgments at the court of first instance as follows, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. Additional assertion and determination thereof

A. The Defendant, a petroleum refining business entity, determined the “base price” applicable to the following month as of the end of each month, provided prior guidance to the customer, including the agency, and applied the “Adjustment Amount” as agreed in advance by each agency based on the notified “base price.”

However, the plaintiffs were informed of the "base price" by the defendant and did not have an agreement with the defendant on the "Adjustment Amount".

In addition, when there is a change in the order price of the product and the price at the time of delivery under each contract of this case, a petroleum refiner shall apply the price at the time of delivery. Article 42-2 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act provides that a petroleum refiner shall report the selling price of petroleum products to the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy, and Article 42-2 (3) 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that the Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy shall disclose the average price during the week and the month of delivery

Therefore, since the price of the product unilaterally determined by the Defendant does not have binding force on the Plaintiffs, each of the contracts of this case is terminated at the time of the termination of each of the contracts of this case, the Defendant’s settlement of the product price already received from the Plaintiffs and return the remainder.

B. In addition to the whole purport of the pleadings in the respective statements of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9 and Gap evidence No. 19 (the evidence with a serial number includes a serial number), each of the instant contracts is subject to Article 3(1) of the Agreement.

arrow