206Na1638 Compensation (as stated)

Maximum objection

00. Automobile Stock Company

Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2005 Ghana5346 Decided January 18, 2006

September 28, 2006

November 2, 2006

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant shall be gold 20,000,000 won and the complaint of this case against the plaintiff.

It shall pay 20% interest per annum from the day after the delivery date of a duplicate to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

The following facts are not disputed between the parties:

A. The Defendant is a company that aims at the manufacture and sale of vehicles, and the Defendant sells a passenger car with new Ecuas V 530 on December 2003: (i) a passenger car with only the basic specifications (48,8800,000 won); (ii) a passenger car with the basic specifications and the AV system for front seat (48,880,000 won + 3.6 million won) ③ a passenger car with a basic specifications and front seat AV system, and DVD neons (48,800,000 won + 3.6 million won).

B. On December 30, 2003, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant for a passenger car of Y350 (hereinafter “instant contract”) of the scoo Scoo V63 on March 5, 2003, and following the day, the Plaintiff was delivered a passenger car of 5 GS350 (hereinafter “the instant scoo and the instant passenger car”).

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

On December 31, 2003, the Plaintiff operated the instant car with the Defendant’s delivery, and used the instant neons. However, Uton or left-hand turn is not possible, despite Uton or left-hand turn, the Plaintiff’s entry guide voice or screen is going out, despite having yet to go through, and multiple defects have been discovered in the instant neons, such as a disagreement between the guide voice and screen, and the Plaintiff’s cancellation of the instant neons portion among the instant contract against the Defendant on December 9, 2004, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff property, mental and physical total damages, KRW 20 million, and damages for delay.

B. Determination

(1) In full view of the following facts: (i) No. 2; (ii) No. 1 to 3; (iii) No. 7; (iv) No. 13; and (v) No. 1 to 3; and (iv) the witness testimony of the lower court; (iv) the witness testimony of the ○○○○○○○ witness Kim ○; and (v) the witness testimony of this Court; and (v) the Seoul Southern District Court established the place of departure with the Seoul Southern District Court on March 204; and (iv) the Defendant had to drive the instant car on the right-hand side of the bridge, which was located on the 6th day after the date of the 0th day of the 2nd day of the 0th day of the 2nd day of the 0th day of the 2nd day of the 0th day of the 2nd day of the 0th day of the 2nd day of the 0th day of the 2nd day of the 2nd day of the 2nd day of the 2nd day of the NA.

On the other hand, there has been a warning that “I shall drive under the direction of the warning,” and only after the Plaintiff divided the pressing of “I consent” as shown under the above warning, it can be recognized that I deliver the manual of use in detail to the Plaintiff, including the operating method of the Resolution, the possibility of an error, and the cautions. In addition, the above (1)

As indicated in subsection (1) of this case, it appears that the guidance error of the Nition does not occur whenever it operates a specific branch (the error in the vicinity of Mapo-gu Office among the errors in the above Paragraph (1) does not appear at the time of inspection by this Court) and it seems that there is no defect or defect in the operation of the Nitionion Equipment itself, such as where the guidance voice is unclear or it is difficult to identify the guidance screen.

(3) In full view of these circumstances, the NAS itself's technical and policy limits, as well as the technical limits due to the allocation of satellites and the technical limits due to the elements unrelated to the construction of the NA such as the vehicle environment, there is a possibility that any error may occur in guiding the location and route of the vehicle (the driver shall not be able to 10% of the NAS, but only can it be used as an auxiliary device) and the plaintiff also knew of this point while purchasing the vehicle of this case with the NAS installed, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the NAS's error occurred due to the technical limits, such as the NAS itself, and there is no reason to believe that the NAS's error does not constitute the NAS's purpose of the contract of this case. Furthermore, the plaintiff's assertion that there is no reason to see that the NAS's error in this case's NAS is a defect without the premise that it is not necessary to achieve the purpose of the contract of this case.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just with this conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Jae-young

Judges Choi Jae-in

Judges Lee Jae-young