(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.01.29 2013가단110314

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.01.29 2013가단110314

손해배상(건)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company primarily responsible for the design business of the interior, etc., and Defendant A is a household production and indoor interior decoration business with the trade name of “C”, and Defendant B is a household production business with the trade name of “D”.

B. On April 24, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Ledian (hereinafter “instant store”) under which the interior interior interior interior interior interior te with respect to “F” franchise store (hereinafter “instant store”) was set as KRW 74,80,000 (including value-added tax) and the period from April 24, 2013 to May 3, 2013, with a contract for the said store (hereinafter “instant store”).

C. Around that time, Defendant B decided to produce and supply furnitures to the instant store via Defendant A’s introduction, and received advance payment of KRW 7,000,000 from the Plaintiff on April 25, 2013.

At that time, the Plaintiff sent a drawing on the production and supply of furniture to the Defendants by e-mail.

[Ground of Recognition] Unstrifed Facts, Gap evidence 1 through 7, 10, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including each number), the result of this court's order to submit financial transaction information, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. On April 24, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the head of a household to be produced and supplied in the instant store (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the period of 14,160,000, and the period of 14,160,000, May 3, 2013, and Defendant A further subcontracted the said production and supply to Defendant B.

B. However, although Defendant B had no intention or ability to produce and supply furnitures to the instant store, Defendant B was urged to manufacture and supply the said furnitures after deceiving it.

Since then on May 3, 2013, Defendant B renounced the production and supply of the instant store on or around May 3, 2013, and the instant store was likely to interfere with the opening point on May 3, 2013.

In addition, Defendant B’s above-mentioned household production and delivery obligation is impossible.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2019.02.20 2018고단3165

-서울동부지방법원 2015.02.04 2014나20396

-광주지방법원 2015.10.01 2014가단63433

-수원지방법원 2014.11.11 2013가단74086

-광주지방법원 2017.01.24 2015가단529893