안전한 바카라 사이트

1. Case summary

안전한 바카라 사이트 executed a master distribution agreement with a company (the “Seller”) under which 안전한 바카라 사이트 would grant to the Seller an exclusive right to sell certain products manufactured by 안전한 바카라 사이트 in the Chinese territories (the “Agreement”). The Agreement contains the minimum purchase requirement, pursuant to which the Seller is required to purchase a certain minimum quantity of the Products from 안전한 바카라 사이트 on a monthly and yearly basis. However, the Seller frequently failed to meet the minimum purchase requirement. Accordingly, 안전한 바카라 사이트 notified that it would terminate the Agreement in accordance with the Agreement. Alleging that the termination of the Agreement was unreasonable, the Seller filed a claim for damages of about KRW1.5 billion against 안전한 바카라 사이트, which consists of money spent promoting the Products in the territories and the outstanding payment to be allegedly made by 안전한 바카라 사이트 to the Seller, on the basis of the clause pertaining to the effect of the Agreement.

 

2. The court’s judgement

 

The court dismissed all the claims made by the Seller, determining that (i) 안전한 바카라 사이트 legally exercises its right to terminate the Agreement given that the expression, “will understand” in the clause relevant to the effect of the Agreement is used when there is no legal obligation and considering the contents and tenor of the clause and the then intents of the parties; and (ii) it cannot find basis on which it can accept the Seller’s claim for 안전한 바카라 사이트’s failure to perform its obligation and it is difficult to see that there is a causal relationship between 안전한 바카라 사이트’s alleged failure and damages claimed by the Seller.

 

3. Our argument and role

 

In making and substantiating our argument, we analyzed the contents and tenor of the Agreement, and industrial practices. We also reasonably presumed circumstances and the parties’ intent surrounding the execution of the Agreement. We presented legal precedents upheld by the Supreme Court of Korea and lower courts in relation to our argument that the phrases, “will understand” and “endeavor to the fullest extent” did not have any legally binding force. We strongly argued that the claims made by the Seller could not be accepted, in itself. In addition, with regard to damages alleged by the Seller, we argued that 안전한 바카라 사이트 did not engage in failure to perform its obligation and there was no causal relationship on the basis of evidence. We also properly examined witnesses summoned by the Seller, and used their testimonies as evidence in favor of 안전한 바카라 사이트. Above all, we pointed out that the Seller’s argument was contradictory and was not convincing. The court accepted all the arguments made by us.

 

4. Implications

 

This case once again confirmed that the phrase, “will understand” is used in general legal documents where no legal obligation arises. It was a ruling confirming that it is important to meticulously review various materials and find contradictions in the other party's claims in order to properly interpret the contents of the contract by assuming the intention of the parties at the time of executing the contract.


□ Attorneys in charge : Baek Chang-won, Lee Bong-sun, Oh Se-jun