logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원진주지원 2017.04.13 2016가합10851
기성금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a company that runs the repair business of ships, and the defendant is a company that manufactures and sells ship structures.

B. Around 2007, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant (U.S. Co., Ltd.) on the condition that the Defendant would subcontract the vessel repair work contracted by Samsung Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant subcontract”). The main contents of the instant subcontract are as follows.

Article 2 (Contract Goods) The application period of contract unit price shall be governed by the separate contract unit price contract form in addition to the contract goods.

Article 3 (Adjustment of Amount) When the weight or number of contract goods is changed, the settlement shall be made according to the unit price of contract.

Article 4 (Private Materials)

(a) Raw materials and design goods necessary for manufacture shall be procured from Samsung Heavy Industries (ju), and subsidiary materials shall be procured from "A" (the defendant's title).

B. According to the instant subcontract, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the full amount of the contract price calculated by multiplying the quantity and unit price in paying the contract price for vessel, not the full amount of the contract price, but the remainder after deducting the cost that the Plaintiff ought to bear from the total contract price.

C. On August 2009 and September 2009, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the remainder after deducting a total of KRW 10,000,000 from the Plaintiff’s total cost when paying the vessel rental cost. From September 2012 to November 2014, the Defendant determined that the Plaintiff should bear part of the vessel rental cost, and paid the remainder after deducting a total of KRW 28,964,410 from the total of 10 times.

The Plaintiff, while performing vessel processing work under the instant subcontract, was difficult to perform additional work if it is necessary to do so, and whether the additional work is a supplement to the existing work.

arrow