logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.07 2014가합531820
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff is a company whose purpose is the wholesale and retail business of petroleum chemical products, and Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is the manufacturing and wholesale business of electronic parts and electronic products.

Defendant C as the vice head of the purchasing team of the Defendant Company, is a person in charge of ordering the printing circuit manufacturer.

On the other hand, D is the actual management owner of a corporation E (hereinafter “E”) who runs the business of manufacturing printed circuit board (PCB).

On December 16, 2013, the Plaintiff and E’s transaction details D suggested the Plaintiff’s representative director F, etc. with false orders and tax invoices under the Defendant Company’s name, and “E imports and re-processing the printed circuit board from China’s H through G, and then supplies the Defendant Company with annual sales amounting to at least 70 billion won as the primary subcontractor of Samsung Electronic. At present, the Defendant Company’s order has increased rapidly. The printing circuit board that should be additionally supplied from G has not been imported from G. Accordingly, the Plaintiff, instead, imported and supplied the printed circuit board from G to E, provided that “E will pay the Plaintiff the price of the goods as if the Plaintiff received the goods from the Defendant Company and received the goods from the Defendant Company,” and that “E will transfer the goods payment claim to the Defendant Company and establish a pledge right.”

D, however, if the Plaintiff transfers the price of the goods on the printed circuit board to G, he shall send the Plaintiff as if the value of the goods is a normal imported goods, and immediately deliver it to E, and the price of the goods received by G was recruited in advance with G management owner, as the price of the goods would be reduced by E.

On December 18, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a basic supply contract with E, and on the same day, KRW 3 billion for the Defendant Company E.

arrow