logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2018.06.07 2017나214757
물품대금
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 19, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to purchase KRW 155,000, a computer component (hereinafter “instant part”) with the Defendant, and paid KRW 155,000 to the Defendant on the same day.

B. On July 22, 2017, the Defendant delivered the instant part to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff requested return of the said part to the Defendant on the ground that there was a defect in the key key among the said parts.

C. The Defendant agreed to return the above domains to the Plaintiff and return the price of KRW 50,000 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant return agreement”). D.

On July 26, 2017, the Plaintiff returned the keyboard among the instant parts to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay KRW 50,000 to the plaintiff according to the instant return agreement.

B. Furthermore, the Plaintiff also sought compensation of KRW 50,000, alleging that the Plaintiff had suffered mental suffering due to the Defendant’s return payment.

However, in case where property damage occurs due to non-performance of obligation, the mental suffering which the contracting party received shall be deemed to have been recovered by the compensation for property damage. Thus, there are special circumstances that the compensation for property damage alone causes irrecoverable mental suffering, and only where the other party knew or could have known such circumstances, the consolation money for mental suffering may be recognized (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Da71158, Jan. 24, 2008). The evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone, which the plaintiff submitted, has special circumstances that the plaintiff suffered irrecoverable mental suffering from the irrecoverable mental suffering, by itself, from the compensation for property damage.

arrow