beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.22 2015가합558396

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. In June 26, 2003, the Defendant concluded an advertisement business agency contract with the Organizing Committee and the said advertising business agency (from July 1, 2013 to December 31, 2004) to pay a total of KRW 1.245 billion, in return for the instant advertising business agency (from July 1, 2013 to December 31, 2004).

B. After the amendment of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes to extend the business period of the above Organizing Committee by December 31, 2006, the defendant applied for the extension of the above agency contract and entered into an extension contract with the above Organizing Committee to extend the agency period for the above advertising business to the above business period and to additionally pay KRW 1,235,781,810, and the Prop-supported Advertising Fund 1,651,200,000 to additionally pay KRW 1,235,781,81,810.

C. Meanwhile, on February 21, 2003, C, a director of the Defendant, established the Plaintiff (formerly named D Co., Ltd.) to support the Defendant’s funding project by carrying out the business of advertising agency, etc., and concluded the “the first agency contract” with the Defendant on June 15, 2003 under the name of the Plaintiff.

Since then, the Plaintiff entered into the second agency contract with the Defendant on August 5, 2004 under the said extension contract with the Organizing Committee. D.

Around August 2006, the Plaintiff entered into a 'third agency contract' with the Defendant, which includes the following contents, and paid KRW 1,482,621,820 to the said Organizing Committee under the name of the Defendant, and paid KRW 26,426 million to the Defendant.

Article 1 (Purpose) The purpose of the above contract is to clarify the rights and obligations of both the plaintiff and the defendant in the event of the transfer of the advertising business right to another agency as a result of the recontract

Article 6 (Obligation of Plaintiff and Defendant) (3) of the Protocol No. 13140, 2004.