beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following order of payment shall be revoked, and
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff operated a gold-type manufacturer with the trade name of C, and supplied the Defendant, who is a retailer of D’s trade name from September 201, to the Defendant, who is a black box and a post-camer case.
B. On March 18, 2013, the Defendant: (a) paid a total of KRW 1,732,00,000,000 (5.5 million out of the price of the black box gold supplied by the Defendant; (b) the remainder of the price of the printed box that will be supplied in the future, KRW 1.5 million, and KRW 3.20,000,000,000,000 in the cost of the sampling production; (c) between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff on March 18, 2013, the Defendant agreed that the Plaintiff is responsible for any defect in gold, and that the final data of the printed box will also be provided to the Defendant on the day.
C. However, on March 18, 2013, the Plaintiff did not provide the Defendant with the final data on gold design, and agreed to revise the gold punishment that was provided to the Defendant by March 21, 2013 as follows: “The occurrence of 300HD products: Eburi, Ebriine,” “150HD products: marging, gold transformation, ebreging of strings,” and “500HD products: inside support unit and three collapses, etc.”
After that, as the plaintiff failed to comply with the promise to correct and deliver defects, the defendant did not pay the penalty, and on April 2, 2014, the plaintiff left part of the penalty that the plaintiff delivered to the defendant without permission.
E. On November 2012, the Defendant: (a) requested the SPC to place an order for the product using a new black box case; and (b) around November 9, 2012, entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to supply the product drawings necessary for the production of gold; (c) around February 3, 2000 as of the end of February 2013; and (d) around March 3, 2013 as of March 3, 2013 with the SPC, taking into account the gold production period of 40 to 50 days.
F. The Plaintiff produced gold punishment from around November 9, 2012, but failed to complete the gold punishment until the end of February 2013, which was the first ordering period. Accordingly, the Defendant’s direct correction of errors, and its own production is intended.