집행판결 청구의 소
1. As to the arbitration case No. 1711-0045 of the Korean Commercial Arbitration Act between the Plaintiff and the Defendant
Basic Facts
- On February 9, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a DNA franchise agreement with the Defendant who runs the franchise store business of the trade name “C” and paid the down payment.
- The Plaintiff filed an application with the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board for arbitration seeking the payment of damages under Article 1711-045 of the Arbitration Board, on the ground that damages, such as down payment, interior construction costs, and house purchase cost, have occurred due to the Defendant’s unilateral closure of the franchise store business, etc.
- On April 5, 2017, the Defendant also opposed to the Plaintiff’s assertion by submitting written answers and relevant evidence to the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board.
- On August 30, 2017, the KCAB rendered an arbitral award in the same content as the attached Form (hereinafter “instant arbitral award”).
[Ground] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, and the enforcement of a judgment on the grounds of a claim for the whole pleadings shall be conducted by the judgment of execution by the court, and the arbitral award made in the Republic of Korea shall be enforced unless there are any special reasons provided for in Article 36(2) of the Arbitration Act (Articles 37 and 38 of the Arbitration Act), barring special circumstances, compulsory execution based on the arbitral award of this case shall be permitted.
The Defendant asserts that the arbitral award in this case unilaterally admitted the receipts, the source and contents of which are unclear, submitted by the KCAB, without verifying the Defendant, and that it was unfair because the Defendant did not properly terminate the franchise agreement with the Plaintiff, without reflecting them.
Any objection to an arbitral award may be raised only by filing a lawsuit to revoke the arbitral award, and the arbitral award has the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment between both parties (Article 35 of the Arbitration Act) and Article 36(2) of the Arbitration Act does not exist.