logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.09.03 2015가합200078
손해배상(기)
Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that processes or manufactures raw materials, raw materials, clothing, etc., and the Defendant is a company that mainly engages in the manufacture, repair, etc. of textile machinery.

B. On February 13, 2009, the Plaintiff is not more than C, which is a machine that produces the original body between the Defendant and the Defendant, as the instant machine.

(i) the purchase price of KRW 140 million (hereinafter referred to as a "contract to purchase value-added tax separately") shall be 10 million.

(C) A. (Evidence 2) The Defendant delivered the instant machine to the Plaintiff on February 17, 2009, and the Plaintiff paid the price of the instant machine to the Defendant in full. [Ground for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute over a dispute, Party A (where a number is available, each number is included; hereinafter the same shall apply).

each entry of evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The machinery of this case can be produced by the original unit regardless of the type of original body, but the machinery of this case could not be produced by defective parts due to defects occurring from the time of delivery. The defendant's repair of the machinery of this case over 10 times, but the purpose of the contract of this case could not be achieved because the plaintiff could not resolve the above defects. Therefore, on the ground of the defendant's delay or incomplete performance, the contract of this case can not be resolved by the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case. Thus, the defendant must pay damages for delay calculated at a rate of 20% per annum from the day following the date of delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment. 2) Further, although the plaintiff supplied the original unit produced by the machinery of this case to D Co., Ltd., the plaintiff supplied the original unit produced by the machinery of this case, the plaintiff caused damages to the plaintiff due to the defect of the original unit which was paid 48,862,780 won.

(However, the plaintiff seems to claim only KRW 46 million out of the above damages. (B)

The Defendant’s assertion 1 of this case is normal.

arrow