(영문) 광주지방법원순천지원 2017.11.30 2015가단78257

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주지방법원순천지원 2017.11.30 2015가단78257

계약금반환

Text

1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be assessed by adding a principal lawsuit and a counterclaim;

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 2010, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to install the scam system and software to build the B-Detection system of scam Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “scamco”).

B. On October 6, 2010, the Plaintiff: (a) contracted the installation of the detection system with scamco; (b) concluded a subcontract with the Defendant for the construction cost of KRW 45 million; and (c) paid the down payment of KRW 17 million on October 15, 2010.

Since then, the Plaintiff requested to add monitoring systems to the detection system, and on April 201, the Plaintiff modified the subcontract terms to add monitoring systems to the existing structure (hereinafter “instant mechanical device”), and accordingly, paid the Defendant the down payment of KRW 2.6 million to the Defendant on June 9, 2011.

Plaintiff

- The Defendant for the support of the operation, approval, and completion of the PLC program of the installation of video communication cable from the vision system to the on-site control office from the non-exclusive system to the installation of electric cables and telecommunications cables, and the Defendant for the support of the operation, completion, etc. of fixed-to-face drawings: the design and installation of the non-exclusive system, the design, preparation, and production of the pilot system drawings, the analysis and contact of the installation PLC program, the addition, action,

C. The source of the instant contract and the content of the Defendant’s obligation are as follows.

On August 11, 2011, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the performance of the instant contract and notified the Defendant that the instant contract would be rescinded if not performed, and the Defendant responded that the instant contract could not be performed on the ground that the cable work and the supply of the PLC program was not performed until the time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 6 through 8, 10, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The Plaintiff’s judgment as to the principal lawsuit shall be made on June 201 by the Defendant.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2019.01.10 2017가단329685

-부산고등법원 (창원) 2021.04.08 2019나14014

-서울북부지방법원 2013.11.27 2012가합10595

-대전지방법원 천안지원 2018.12.21 2017가합102849

-인천지방법원 2014.09.26 2013가단71912