beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.12.20 2018나2003784

추심금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. A. On January 5, 2010, the Defendant entered into the instant contract with A around January 5, 2010. However, on June 25, 2013, the evidence No. 1 was replaced by a joint and several surety and again prepared on June 25, 2013. The Defendant asserts that the content is the same as the original contract, and the Plaintiff does not specifically dispute this.

A and A were entrusted by the Defendant with the business of purchasing goods and services, and receiving fees, and the Defendant entered into a consignment agency contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the content that A shall pay a certain fee to A in return.

B. In accordance with the instant contract, A is obligated to pay the Defendant the amount of KRW 7% of the communication fees paid by the customer confined in A, other than the one-time service charges, such as the “admission fee,” “attraction fee,” and “CS fee,” and the “management fee,” which are the fixed fee paid by the customer for about 36 to 60 months. On the contrary, A bears the obligation to pay the Defendant the terminal fee provided by the Defendant, the terminal fee provided by the Defendant, the short-term operation fund provided by the Defendant to A, the rent, and various public charges.

C. The Defendant: (a) entered the Defendant’s account settlement balance sheet in which various claims, debt settlement results, etc. are recorded; (b) entered into the information network, which is a computer network jointly owned with the entrusting agency, and (c) made it available for perusal and printing in A; and (d) accordingly, settled accounts with A and the consignment fee.

On June 2, 2015, the Defendant: (a) as of June 2, 2015, “A” did not pay a total of KRW 1,953,323,871, such as the price of a device against the Defendant, as of June 2, 2015; (b) thus, the Defendant would have paid a full amount of the overdue debt by July 2, 2015; and (c) if the repayment was not made by the said date, the termination of the instant contract and the procedure for compulsory collection of claims.