beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 37,812,50 for the Plaintiff and the following day: 5% per annum from May 1, 2013 to July 7, 2015.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The plaintiff's assertion: The grounds for the claim are as shown in the annexed sheet.
(b) Rule 1) Nos. 1 through 9 of the facts of recognition (including branch numbers, if any)
Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff’s each entry is entitled to the instant machines (hereinafter “instant machines”) around October 5, 2012.
(2) On April 1, 2013, the Plaintiff purchased and entrusted the repair of the machinery to the Defendant operating the mechanical repair business. However, the Defendant, while repairing the instant machinery, arbitrarily brought about the main parts of the instant machinery, and damaged the mechanical device, and recognized the fact that there is a cost of repair equivalent to KRW 37,812,500 to install and repair the main parts of the instant machinery, and to install and repair the main parts of the mechanical system, the main parts of which are the main parts of the mechanical system of this case. (2) The Plaintiff’s claim portion of ordinary damages is seeking KRW 23,60,000,000, in total, for the cost of altering the system at KRW 49,50,000,000, which is a price for purchasing the instant machinery due to ordinary damages.
In general, damages caused by illegal acts should be regarded as the market price at the time of loss when the goods are destroyed, when the goods are damaged, the expenses incurred in repairing or restoring the goods when they are able to be repaired or restored, or in cases where repair or restoration is impossible or the expenses are excessive, the amount reduced in exchange value due to the damage
(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da44633 Decided April 28, 2006). According to the above facts, the machinery of this case appears to be able to be repaired, and since its repair cost is KRW 37,812,500, it shall be deemed as ordinary damages. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiff for the above repair cost of KRW 37,812,50.
Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remainder is without merit.
3. The plaintiff on the claim for special damages was unable to produce the product using the instant machine due to the special damage.