beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 2,227,90 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) for KRW 2,227,90 and the amount from September 19, 2015 to March 10, 2017.
Reasons
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. The Plaintiff, from January 19, 2012 to August 27, 2015, has engaged in the clinical processing transactions with the Defendant and the Plaintiff for parts, etc. necessary for the manufacture of the Plaintiff’s machinery (hereinafter “instant transaction”). The Defendant processed and supplied the relevant parts in accordance with the drawing provided by the Plaintiff.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Eul's evidence 1-1-35, Eul's evidence 2-1-8, the purport of whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff asserts that, as the principal lawsuit, the plaintiff is obliged to pay damages equivalent to KRW 50,000,00 to the plaintiff, since the defendant's argument is that the transaction amount that the plaintiff did not pay to the plaintiff in total to 2,227,90,000, because the transaction amount that the plaintiff did not pay to the defendant in accordance with the transaction in this case is total 2,227,90,00 won, and the defendant should pay 2,227,90 won and delay damages to the plaintiff, even though the processing, drum processing, scam processing, scam-type scam-type scam-type scam-type scam-type scam-type scam-type scam-type scam-type scam-type scam-type scam.
B. We examine the judgment as to the claim 1 principal claim, and the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively considering the purport of the entire arguments as to each of the above evidence, ① the plaintiff has been engaged in the transaction of this case with the defendant for not less than three years, and continuously settled the processing expenses. ② The defendant processed parts in accordance with the drawing presented by the plaintiff, and supplied parts by reprocessing and modifying the parts at the plaintiff’s request. ③ The plaintiff was supplied to the customer after assembling the parts supplied by the defendant and manufacturing the parts to be supplied by the defendant. At the time of delivery, the plaintiff was supplied to the defendant.