logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.06.22 2016나11934
물품대금
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 20, 2015, the Defendant: (a) requested the Plaintiff to manufacture and install a scrink at the kitchen located in Daegu C Housing (hereinafter “instant Housing”); and (b) around August 2015, the Plaintiff was on the instant housing site in comparison with the Plaintiff at the instant housing site.

B. Around October 20, 2015, the Plaintiff established one of the instant housing poles (hereinafter “instant Washington”).

C. On November 6, 2015, the Defendant told the Plaintiff to the effect that “if the Plaintiff did not install the instant additional part of the plate, 3 equipment, and human lighting agent board (hereinafter “the instant additional part”), the Defendant removed the instant scam (hereinafter “the first statement”) and the Plaintiff prepared the instant additional part of the bid.”

On November 10, 2015, the Plaintiff stated to the Defendant that “if all of the 2.25 million won, a full amount of the price, would not be paid, the additional part of the instant case shall not be installed.” Accordingly, the Defendant stated to the Plaintiff that “A collection of the phishing tea is being made.”

(hereinafter referred to as “second statement”). (e)

After that, the Plaintiff did not install the instant additional part, and on January 12, 2016, the Defendant: (a) entered into a contract with E, which sets up the instant Washington in the housing marina and operates the “D household”; and (b) paid KRW 1,700,000 to E, under which the Plaintiff entered into a contract with E, to install the instant Washington 1, singular stone plates, and gas bags in the instant housing.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, 4 (if there are serial numbers, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 to 4, 6, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's ground for claim

A. On October 11, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the purchase of goods with the Defendant for KRW 2.250,000,000,000,000,00,000,00,000,000,000,000,000,000.

arrow