beta
Text
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 7,000,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from October 26, 2018 to May 31, 2019.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On March 15, 2018, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to repair the instant truck owned by the Plaintiff and to produce the shower Si (hereinafter “the shower Si of this case”), designating the specific form and figures of the shower Si of this case, etc., and the Defendant presented the relevant drawings as indicated in the separate sheet.
B. After that, between the Defendant on March 19, 2018, the Plaintiff requested the production as indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant, setting the period of delivery as the totaling KRW 51.7 million (including the additional production cost of KRW 6.6 million, including the cost of the shower production of KRW 45.1 million and the cost of alteration of the main press, etc.) and the delivery period on May 18, 2018. The Plaintiff paid the down payment of KRW 7 million to the Defendant on the same day.
C. After producing the show of this case, the Defendant tried to complete the safety inspection of automobiles from the Korea Traffic Safety Authority on May 15, 2018, and deliver it to the Plaintiff. However, on June 2018, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to perform the additional work of flass, connecting flass flass flass, connecting 4 strings, upper part of 4 strings, and flass flass, and flass flass, after cutting off the flass upper part, and the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to accept the said part on August 21, 2018, and sent the Defendant a certificate of content to the effect that the contract will be terminated if the Plaintiff did not accept by August 31, 2018. The mail certified the content at that time arrived at the Defendant.
On August 22, 2018, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to make a new manufacture because the repair of the part requested by the Plaintiff cannot be resolved only by the contact, and thus, the Plaintiff sent a notification demanding re-production by August 30, 2018, such as requesting the Defendant to make the last end height of the shower in the shower city at the time of the instant case 740cm, and making the back to the back be consistent with the home of the back cover.
[Judgment of the court below]