beta
(영문) 대법원 2015.04.23 2013다61961

손해배상(기)

Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the ground of appeal No. 1, based on its stated reasoning, the lower court determined as follows: (a) the Defendants violated the obligation of exclusive contracts under Articles 3 and 5 of the instant management agreement and Article 2 of the instant agreement by excluding the Plaintiff holding exclusive authority over the transfer negotiation of Defendant B pursuant to the instant management agreement and the instant agreement (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant agreement”); and (b) making a third party transfer to Q Qold; and (c) making the third party transfer to Qold.

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court’s aforementioned fact-finding and determination are justifiable. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on interpretation

2. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 2 and 3, the lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, concluded that the Defendants first rescinded the instant contract on the grounds of the Plaintiff’s nonperformance prior to rescinding the instant contract.

(2) The court below rejected the Defendants’ assertion that the contract of this case was revoked on the ground of the Plaintiff’s deception or mistake, since the Plaintiff, at the time of the contract of this case, knew the Defendants as to the important part of the contract of this case, or

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on cancellation of contract, deception or mistake.

3...