(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.01.28 2014가단200866

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) 서울남부지방법원 2015.01.28 2014가단200866

임가공대금 청구의 소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 30, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract for processing with the effect that the Plaintiff processed the clothing raw materials provided by the Defendant and produced and supplied the clothing.

B. Accordingly, from October 22, 2013 to November 21, 2013, the Defendant produced and supplied to the Defendant a total of 2,731 copies of the product number S134DK102 clothes 934 (the processing cost 10,274,00 won; hereinafter “instant product”), S134DK204 clothing 481 (the processing cost 7,936,500 won), S134DL 207 clothes 932 (the processing cost 11,277,200 won), S134DP 103 clothing 384 (the processing cost 6,336,00 won), and the processing cost 35,703,700 won.

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2 (including provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply)

3) Each entry of Gap evidence No. 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the factual basis of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the cost of processing KRW 35,823,700 and the damages for delay thereof, barring any special circumstance.

3. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of rescission of agreement

A. 1) The parties asserted that among the clothing produced and supplied by the plaintiff by the plaintiff, the defects manufactured more than normal values of the product of this case were discovered and the consultation was held, and as a result of the consultation, the plaintiff returned all of the clothing by agreement to compensate for the costs of original and original materials instead of receiving all the clothing manufactured by himself/herself. As such, the contract of this case was rescinded by agreement. 2) The contract of this case was concluded to return the plaintiff's assertion. However, there was no agreement on the remaining costs of processing or original and original materials, and the defendant returned them to the defendant without omitting part of the clothing, and thus, the contract of this case cannot be deemed to have been rescinded.

(b) the facts of recognition are as follows: Gap evidence 1, 5, and Eul evidence 1 to 3.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2015.03.27 2014가단47597

-수원지방법원 2015.10.20 2014가단68682

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.10.24 2013가합535917

-서울북부지방법원 2016.11.24 2015가단2970

-서울북부지방법원 2020.11.24 2018가단9880