손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. A. Around October 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant that (i) the Plaintiff shall act on behalf of the Defendant for marketing activities to increase the Defendant’s sales, provide knowledge of management and know-how to support the promotion of the advancement of stores by providing them with the promotion of the advancement of stores; (ii) the Plaintiff shall provide the services provided under Article 4(1) through (11) of the contract, including the implementation of education, and supply the goods provided free of charge at the early stage after the contract. (iii) The Defendant entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 10,000,000 for the consulting proceeding cost (on termination), monthly membership fee of KRW 1,20,000 for membership fee (excluding value-added tax) and KRW 1,00 for membership fee of KRW 20,00 for each month.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”). (b)
In accordance with the instant contract, the Defendant opened and operated the C Original Point around November 2013, and the Plaintiff continued management consulting, education, and service support to the Defendant before and after the opening of the C Original Point.
C. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 10,000,000 on September 16, 2013, and paid monthly membership fees, etc. from November 2013 to June 2014.
(D) The remainder of KRW 10,000,000 out of the total sum of consulting and security deposits for participation shall not be paid (20,000,000).
However, from July 2014 to July 2014, disputes arose regarding whether the instant contract was performed between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and whether the instant contract was a franchise store contract. From July 2014 to July 21, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the termination of the instant contract by asserting the fraud contract against the Plaintiff and verifying the content of the contract.
E. A case that the Defendant reported to the Fair Trade Commission on the charge of violating the Fair Transactions in Franchise Business Act (hereinafter “Franchising Act”) was terminated on July 2015 on the ground that the instant contract was not subject to the Franchise Business Act, and the case that she filed a criminal complaint by fraud was around August 2016.