logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 공주지원 2018.06.21 2017가단1188
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff runs the wholesale and retail business of water supply and sewerage materials in the name of “C”, and the Defendant runs the manufacturing business of water supply and sewerage materials in the name of “D.”

B. From May 19, 2016 to February 22, 2017, the Plaintiff supplied pipes (el, 707,070 won, etc.; hereinafter “instant materials”) equivalent to KRW 54,707,070 from the Defendant and supplied them to the Si of the E public sewerage installation project (hereinafter “instant project”).

C. However, the contractor of the instant project requested the Plaintiff to repair the instant material if the Plaintiff generated water from the instant material. Accordingly, on April 30, 2017, the Plaintiff spent KRW 33,01,000 under the name of the equipment rental fee, transportation cost, and equipment rental fee, and repaired the said material.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including each branch number in the case with a branch number) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff bears 3,01,000 won of the defect repair cost due to the defect of the materials manufactured by the Defendant, and incurred losses that should be borne by the contractor of the instant project in the future, with the additional defect repair cost of KRW 50,000,000.

Therefore, as a claim for damages under Article 3(1) of the Product Liability Act, the Defendant is seeking payment of KRW 33,01,000, which is a part of the above damages.

3. Determination

A. Product liability is a liability for damages incurred to a manufacturer, etc. in the event of damage to life, body, or property other than the product itself due to a defect that has a lack of safety normally expected to be the product. Damage incurred to the product itself due to a lack of product adequacy is not subject to product liability.

(See Article 3(1) of the Product Liability Act, Supreme Court Decision 97Da26593 delivered on February 5, 199, Supreme Court Decision 98Da3525 delivered on July 28, 200, etc.).

arrow