logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2015.07.17 2015가단204290
기계대금반환
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from March 12, 2015 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to purchase livestock excreta treatment machinery (hereinafter “instant machinery”) at KRW 60,000,000.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). The principal contents of the instant contract are as follows.

1. The name of machine: A set of 1 set of 100 tons for the ozone generating device model DW 100 tons (60,000,000);

2. The daily amount of goods shall be ten million won (60,000,000); and

3. A and B shall enter into a contract and pay as down payment a daily0 million won (10,000,000) in advance.

4. The intermediate payment shall be paid twenty million won (20,000,000 won) on May 5, 2014;

5. The delivery date shall be by no later than May 30, and the payment shall be made in consultation if there is no less than two years after the examination is conducted.

B. The Plaintiff’s down payment to the Defendant KRW 5,00,000,000 on April 4, 2014, and the same month.

7. The payment of KRW 10,000,000 in total, including KRW 5,000,000 for the same year.

5. 16. Payment of intermediate payment of KRW 20,000,000.

C. On July 3, 2014, the Defendant supplied the instant machinery to the Plaintiff’s work site, but did not operate the machinery, and the Defendant, in addition to the instant machinery, recommended the Defendant to purchase a high-amount separation machine.

8. Although a large-scale separation machine was installed on 29.2, the instant machine still did not operate.

As the Plaintiff resisted against the Defendant and urged the Defendant to implement the instant contract, the Defendant agreed on October 27, 2014 to ensure the normal operation of the instant machinery and to take measures to recover and refund the machinery in the event that it does not operate normally, but did not operate the instant machinery normally.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 10, purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts, the defendant did not perform the duty of delivery of the machinery of this case under the contract of this case. Thus, the payment order of this case containing the plaintiff's expression of intent to cancel the contract of this case.

arrow