logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.08.25 2017나54881
기타(금전)
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant imported and supplied the instant parts to the Plaintiff by a Chinese company “A” (hereinafter “instant parts”) and supplied them to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff supplied the instant parts to the LG UIT devices using the instant parts. The Plaintiff supplied the instant parts to the LG UIT devices.

B. On October 20, 2015, the Plaintiff was notified that the 8,000 pcs of defective parts of the instant part, which was supplied by the Defendant to DaNS on October 12, 2015, 5,305, and 2,695 of the remaining parts, were defective due to the occurrence of defective parts (LED brightness) in the 8,000 pcs of the instant part, which were supplied to Daz., and that the 5,305 parts of the instant case were defective, as a result of a conference on the status of defective parts and the disposal of the defective parts of the instant case, 21.

C. Accordingly, on October 23, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the occurrence of the defective parts of the instant case, the result of meetings, etc., and sent a notice to the Defendant that the cause analysis and the request for countermeasures.

On November 17, 2015, the Plaintiff received damages of KRW 7,381,140 (including additional tax, KRW 8,119,254) in total, including KRW 6,476,140, and KRW 905,00,00,00 due to the defective parts of the instant parts, and the Plaintiff received damages of KRW 7,381,140 (including additional tax, KRW 8,119,254), and on November 25, 2015, the Plaintiff also received damages of KRW 7,381,140 from DaNE due to the defective parts of the instant parts, and the Plaintiff also received damages of KRW 6,60,00 due to the decline in sales, and notified the Defendant that the Plaintiff should claim damages of KRW 13,981,140 (including additional tax).

E. On December 31, 2015, the Plaintiff claimed KRW 15,379,254 against the Defendant for “11/25 damages claim,” but us.

arrow