beta
Text
1. The Korea Commercial Arbitration Board No. 12113-0033 (this application) between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and Article 1212.
Reasons
Facts of recognition
The plaintiff is a Korean legal entity that produces automobile-related rubber parts, etc., and the defendant is a legal entity established in accordance with the U.S. law and has its head office in the U.S. in order to perform duties under the sales agency contract
On June 1, 2006, the Plaintiff entered into a sales agency contract with the Defendant for sales and public relations activities in the United States and Canada (hereinafter “the first contract of this case”). On May 16, 2008, with respect to the first contract of this case, the Plaintiff entered into a modified contract with the Defendant to pay a certain ratio of sales proceeds to the Defendant for the sales proceeds of the goods ordered by the Defendant. The Plaintiff entered into a modified contract with the content that changes the contract period and the scope of the business area (hereinafter “the second contract of this case”) (hereinafter “the second contract of this case”) and the second contract of this case.
Meanwhile, according to the agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant on April 29, 201 and the Escupe agreement on May 3, 201, the Plaintiff agreed to receive 10% of the sales proceeds from the revenue of Mak Group through the Escup account in the names of the Plaintiff and the Defendant joint owners, and the remainder of 1% was paid directly by the Plaintiff to the Defendant.
Since then, a dispute occurred between the Plaintiff and the Defendant as the Defendant refused to pay sales proceeds while the Defendant was performing business agency services under the instant contract.
Accordingly, pursuant to Article 11 of the second contract of this case, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for payment of US$ 2,356,021.183, 173, 322.73, and 6,000,000 (Article 1213-033 of Arbitration) against the Defendant (Article 1215, 312.32, and 496,596.82, from June 16, 2011 to May 30, 2013) (Article 1212-036 of Arbitration), and the Defendant also filed an application for objection against the payment of the business expense for the Plaintiff (Article 1212-036 of Arbitration).