(영문) 서울고등법원 2021.01.26 2018나9816 | 리걸엔진

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) 서울고등법원 2021.01.26 2018나9816

손해배상금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following order for payment is revoked, and that part is revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant, as the representative of B, a trade agency, will purchase goods with the money and make it possible for the plaintiff to obtain profits from the purchase of the goods by proxy through international electronic commerce.

The term “this case’s goods supply contract” refers to the purport that it was concluded with the Plaintiff on September 4, 2015, and concluded a goods supply contract by extending the contract period on January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2017 (hereinafter “instant goods supply contract”). The major content of the instant goods supply contract is as follows.

Article 1 (Purpose) The purpose of this Agreement is to promote mutual interests by continuously supplying goods to the Plaintiff, and as a result, the Plaintiff provided the price for goods to B with the rights and duties of the parties, matters concerning the relevant duties and procedures, and the standards for resolution at the time of the occurrence of the dispute, and allowing them to comply therewith.

Article 2 (Definitions of Terms)

1. Advance payment: The purchase price that the Plaintiff made in advance to receive the goods from B is the amount that the Plaintiff is obligated to return if the Plaintiff demands the return; and

Article 6 (Period of Contract) (2) In the event that the difference between the total export declaration value of the goods supplied to B and the purchase value of the goods listed in the tax invoice does not amount to 80% per annum of an advance payment, this contract shall be extended to the end of 80% per annum, and during the special extension period, B shall be obligated to supply the goods to the Plaintiff, and during this period B shall not claim payment of the price of the goods to the Plaintiff.

B. From November 23, 2015 to September 19, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 158,000,000 as advance payment under the instant product supply contract to B.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

(a) An amount equivalent to advance payment;

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2021.01.26 2018나9816

-인천지방법원 2018.03.07 2017가단235455

-서울남부지방법원 2020.06.12 2019나1638

-서울동부지방법원 2021.04.22 2017가단139108

-서울북부지방법원 2021.01.14 2019가합20522