포상금 지급 청구의 소
1. The defendant shall enter the plaintiff 1 to 20 in the annexed claim number column of the attached sheet in the corresponding claim amount column of the same attached sheet.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. In order to create a fair market order in the mobile communications market as an incorporated association established under the Framework Act on Broadcasting Communications Development, the Defendant is operating a report reward system on the violation of the Mobile Device Distribution Act at the time of subscription to mobile phones, which is entrusted by three mobile carriers (in case of referring to the above radio operators, hereinafter “stock company”). The main contents are as indicated in the attached report reward system.
B. The Plaintiffs joined a mobile carrier and opened a mobile phone, and reported the Defendant’s violation of the Mobile Device Distribution Act and the payment in excess of the subsidy (the Plaintiff received the subsidy exceeding KRW 100,00 and less than KRW 200,00) at the time of joining the mobile carrier. The Defendant refused to pay the subsidy. The details are as follows.
1. Subscription to the case V on August 22, 2015, Plaintiff A and the same year
9. 4. The Defendant reported one case (related to the conclusion of an individual contract) of a violation of the Act on the Distribution of Terminals and Devices, but the payment is refused on December 30, 2015 on the ground that it is confirmed as a case related to the radio operator and the distribution store employees. Plaintiff B joined the KW on September 16, 2015, and entered the same year.
9. 25. On October 1, 2015, the Defendant reported one case (related to the conclusion of an individual contract) of violation of the Mobile Device Distribution Act to the Defendant. However, on December 30 of the same year, the payment was refused on the grounds that the case related to the telecommunications company and distribution store employees was confirmed. 3) Plaintiff C subscribed to ELS X on October 1, 2015, and reported the Defendant’s excessive payment of subsidies on the same day, but the payment was refused on the ground that it was confirmed on February 22, 2016 as an unspecified large number of organizational reports. 4) Plaintiff D subscribed to KSY on October 24, 2015 and reported to the Defendant on the excessive payment of subsidies on November 5, 2016. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 26948, Feb. 22, 2016>