(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2016.06.17 2015가합207880

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) 수원지방법원성남지원 2016.06.17 2015가합207880

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

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion entered into a contract with the Defendant Company B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”), under which the Plaintiff would be supplied by the Defendant Company with a capator, ductor, and penine (hereinafter “instant goods”), and paid a total amount of KRW 2,570,292,839 to the Defendant Company after receiving the instant goods from around 201 to 2015.

However, in the process of calculating the cost for the development of new products, the plaintiff knew that the price of the goods in this case of the defendant company was higher than two times the price of the other company, and resisting this to the defendant company, the defendant company recognized the error on November 17, 2015 and presented the price of goods reduced to the plaintiff.

Defendant C was in charge of the conclusion of the above contract as a purchaser. Considering that there was a gap between the representative director of the Defendant Company and the representative director, it seems that the Defendants conspired to induce the Plaintiff to supply the goods of this case at a price higher than the market price.

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the difference between the discount price presented by the Defendant Company around November 17, 2015 and the cumulative purchase quantity multiplied by the cumulative purchase quantity, and damages for delay.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The fact of recognition is that the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant Company to be supplied with the instant goods from the Defendant Company (hereinafter “instant contract”). From around 2011 to July 2015, the Plaintiff supplied the instant goods from the Defendant Company and paid the Defendant Company totaling KRW 2,570,292,839 as the price of the goods; and the fact that the Defendant C, who was an employee of the Plaintiff in charge of the process of entering into the instant contract, negotiated the price of the instant goods with the Defendant Company does not conflict between the parties.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2019.01.30 2018나21281

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.12.23 2020가합530675

-서울서부지방법원 2021.02.17 2019가합1411

-서울동부지방법원 2017.10.20 2016나28431

-창원지방법원 2015.06.18 2014노2798