Anyang Law Office Assistance | Daeryun Anyang Law Office Has an Unjust Monetary Claim Dismissed, Protecting 40 Million Won

The client operates an industrial machinery and equipment company located in Anyang.

The client manufactured and supplied a packaging machine requested by the plaintiff and received a manufacturing payment of 40 million won.

However, one month later, the plaintiff returned the packaging machine, claiming that it did not operate properly. The plaintiff then expressed an intention to rescind the contract for work on the ground that the packaging machine was defective and filed a lawsuit seeking the return of the manufacturing payment of 40 million won.

The client came to the Daeryun LLC Anyang Law Office to have that claim dismissed.

■ Civil Act Article 664 (Definition of Contract for Work)

A contract for work shall take effect when one party agrees to complete certain work and the other party agrees to pay remuneration for the result of that work.

■ Civil Act Article 667 (Warranty Liability of the Contractor)

(1) Where there is a defect in the completed object or in a completed portion before completion, the person ordering the work may demand that the contractor repair the defect within a reasonable period. However, this shall not apply where the defect is not material and the repair would require excessive cost.

(2) The person ordering the work may claim damages in lieu of, or together with, the repair of the defect.

(3) The provisions of Article 536 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the case under the preceding paragraph.

■ Civil Act Article 669 (Exemption Where the Defect Is Attributable to Materials Supplied or Instructions Given by the Person Ordering the Work)

The foregoing shall not apply where the defect in the object is attributable to the nature of the materials supplied by the person ordering the work or to the instructions of that person.

The Daeryun Anyang Law Office acknowledged the fact of the defect asserted by the plaintiff.

However, it argued that what mattered was not the existence of a defect but 'liability'.

This is because the packaging machine manufactured by the client was a machine produced in accordance with the plaintiff's design instructions.

That is, relying on Civil Act Article 669, the Daeryun Anyang Law Office emphasized that 'because the packaging machine in question was manufactured in accordance with the plaintiff's instructions, the contract for work cannot be rescinded on the ground of a defect'.

Under Civil Act Article 669, an exemption may apply where a defect is attributable to the materials supplied or the instructions given by the person ordering the work.

In this Anyang case as well, because the design was made in accordance with the plaintiff's instructions, this could be asserted under Civil Act Article 669 as a ground for dismissing the monetary claim.

■ Facts Confirmed by the Anyang Law Office

1. The packaging machine in this case was manufactured based on the plaintiff's patent.

2. The client prepared the drawings in accordance with the plaintiff's instructions and obtained the plaintiff's confirmation.

3. The client also received and obtained confirmation of the plaintiff's instructions during the process of manufacturing the packaging machine in this case.

The outcome of a civil case such as a monetary claim depends on proving the causal relationship with respect to negligence.

Daeryun LLC handles all preparation on behalf of clients after consultation through a one-stop solution.

If you need legal assistance in a situation such as the above, please visit the Daeryun LLC Anyang Law Office, which provides a thorough argument dedicated to the client.