Korea Gas Corporation (Attorney Kim Jong-hwan et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Head of Pyeongtaek-si (Attorney Choi Sung-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

June 1, 2016

Suwon District Court Decision 2014Guhap53200 Decided June 4, 2015

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. Each disposition that the defendant made against the plaintiff shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of this court's judgment is as shown in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of some of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

○ 4, 5, 6 parallels are as follows.

1) On October 16, 1995, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the introduction of LNG with Ras Laffan Glas (hereinafter “Ratar exporter”) on the following and subsequently revised part of the above contract on June 30, 1997.

○ 5. 6. 6. 6. 6. to 12.

In order to calculate the amount of loss of LNG due to the weather from the price adjustment of the LNG price to the Republic of Korea, which reflects the characteristics of the FOB in the table special agreement contained in the main sentence, and to make the market LNG price coincide with the market price at the time of delivery of the main port of importation, the seller agrees to deduct the amount of the market LNG price from the market price at the time of delivery of the main port of importation. PNG price calculation under Article 9.2 (a) is determined in accordance with the following formula. PNG price calculation is determined in accordance with the following formula. (1-B.O) x (1-B.O) x (1-2.2. 30 on June 30, 1997; (2) the amendment of the Special Agreement to calculate the contract price from the seller of the FOB to the market price at the time of delivery of the main port of importation; and (3) the amount of the contract price at the time of delivery to the 2OG price at the time of transportation x x.2.

From the 7 side to the 7 side to the 5 side "nurg". The 5 side to the "nurging time".

At the bottom of the ○ 8 side, the phrase “A No. 11, No. 12” shall be added to 3 others (based on recognition).

Article 3-5 (2) 1 of the 15th 10th 10th 14th 9th 9th 14th 10th 10th 2th 3th 3th 200.

The portion from 16th to 18th "ship, etc." and the part from 10th to 18th "ship, etc." and the part from 15th to 18th "amount" are as follows:

【All the expenses actually paid for by the charter party (including the official charter party) in case of transporting by way of the charter party】

○ 12. 13. The following shall be added to:

【Import Contracts, amended on June 30, 1997, provide that “The contract shall be reduced by the amount of the contract to the extent of the amount of the BOG volume” and make it clear.”

○ At the bottom of 13 up to 4:

【Plaintiff’s assertion that each of the introduction contracts of this case is a unit price transaction, but the unit price transaction under Article 5-13 subparag. 1 of the Notice of this case is premised on the existence of the terms of price adjustment. The terms of price adjustment under each of the introduction contracts of this case alleged by the Plaintiff’s assertion of this case are the first pricing because the initial pricing is the final pricing, and it cannot be seen as a price adjustment agreement because there is no conceptual element such as a provisional fixing of price and a price adjustment

○ 15. 6. The following shall be added to:

【Plaintiff’s free provision of BOG to the Plaintiff’s navigator does not constitute “actual cost,” and thus, the Plaintiff’s free provision of BOG does not constitute “actual cost,” under Article 3-5(2)3 of the Notice of this case, and even if it may be added, it cannot be added by evaluating the value of BOG in the same way as that of general LNG value. However, as a goods with economic value and the Plaintiff provided fuel to the navigator and reduced the corresponding fare, it can be assessed as equal to “actual cost,” and as such, BOG is generated from LNG, which is the imported goods of this case, the same value as the imported goods of this case.

○ 15 pages 15 15 - "not to be protected" shall be "protective."

○ 21, 21 to 23, each of which is as follows:

3. In case of transporting by way of a charter party, all the expenses actually paid by the charter party concerned (including the official charter party)

2. Conclusion

The judgment of the first instance is justifiable. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

[Attachment]

Judges Kim Yong-open (Presiding Justice)