(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.12.18 2014나10203

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) 대구지방법원 2014.12.18 2014나10203

물품대금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts: Contract price under Article 2: 200 million won for the payment of the down payment (excluding value-added tax): (1) the down payment, ratio of 30%, amount of 60 million won, (2) the payment, ratio of intermediate payment, 40%, amount of 80 million won, announcement of entry of payment time facilities, (3) the balance, ratio of 30%, amount of 60 million won, the examination and trial run under Article 8 at the time of completion of the inspection of the payment period, (1) the Plaintiff shall be conducted at the designated place of the Defendant, and the period of trial operation until the completion of the inspection shall be one month from the payment date under Article 3(1).

(2) In cases where a failure to complete a trial operation within the agreed period causes loss to the defendant, such as the suspension of production, etc., the same condition as the repayment in delay shall apply to the number of days of loss per day.

(other than the schedule adjusted by the Council and the Defendant for special reasons). (A)

On or around March 5, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to supply the Defendant with 1 set of just (Bosss laping /C, hereinafter “instant machinery”) for the just (hereinafter “instant contract”), and the main contents thereof are as follows.

B. On May 2012, the Plaintiff supplied the instant machinery to the Defendant, and up to now, did not receive the remainder of KRW 59 million from the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) supplied the instant machinery to the Defendant, and completed the examination on August 24, 2012, after which the Plaintiff supplied the instant machinery, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the remainder that the Plaintiff calculated by subtracting the Plaintiff’s reduction of KRW 18 million from the remainder that the Plaintiff did not pay, KRW 41 million, and delay damages therefrom. 2) Since the examination, which is the terms and conditions for the payment of the remainder under the instant contract, was not completed, the Defendant’s obligation to pay the remainder did not arise.

B. Determination 1 of the instant machinery

유사 판례

-대구지방법원서부지원 2014.05.21 2012가단36153

-부산지방법원 2015.11.04 2014가합51339

-창원지방법원 2015.12.17 2014가합6084

-수원지방법원 2014.11.26 2013나40282

-부산지방법원 2019.03.19 2017가단334250