logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2014.10.31 2012가합12405
손해배상(기) 등
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall pay to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) KRW 227,934,192 as well as the full payment from January 3, 2013.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On or around March 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant provided electronic chips to the Defendant, and the Defendant provided the electronic chips received from the Plaintiff to the PCB supplied by the Defendant, and the parts supply and assembly agreement (hereinafter referred to as “instant assembly agreement”) to complete the electronic display board and deliver them to the Plaintiff after assembling the PED supplied by the Defendant.

) The PCB cover 4,000 PCB cover 4,000 2,000 5,5000 22,0000 22,710,000,000 PCB cover 2,200,200,000 PCB cover 4,300 17,200,000 17,200,7200,000 17,720,720,000 PC, PCB 1PCS and 22,100,000 PCBS and 22,210,210,000 (including value added tax)

B. According to the instant assembly agreement, the details of the products that the Defendant agreed to supply to the Plaintiff and the amount that the Plaintiff agreed to pay to the Defendant are as follows.

C. The Plaintiff paid KRW 90 million to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of the principal claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the product was delivered by the Defendant could not be easily used on an election vehicle due to defective or defectiveness.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff rescinds the instant assembly agreement by serving a duplicate of the complaint of this case.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the money received from the plaintiff according to the assembly agreement of this case and damages suffered by the plaintiff.

B. (1) According to the reasoning of the judgment below, each description and image of Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 9, and the result of the on-site verification and the purport of this court’s argument, where the defendant installed a product supplied to the plaintiff in the electronic display board case and printed out screen pictures, the part of the screen of the electronic display board does not enter, and it is reproduced in a color different from its original color or in color, and the above reason for the above defect is attributable.

arrow