약정지분금 청구
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claim for damages arising from a tort added in the trial are all dismissed.
2...
The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as follows: (a) except for the modification of the part of “public performance ticket sales proceeds” to “public performance ticket sales proceeds” as stated in paragraph (1) of the first instance judgment’s reasoning, except for the modification of the part of “public performance ticket sales proceeds” to “public performance ticket sales proceeds” under the proviso of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. As such, this part of the court’s reasoning is as follows.
The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion about the method of settlement of determination as to the cause of claim for the agreed amount claim is that the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to transfer 10% of the sales amount, which is the method of settlement stipulated in the main sentence of Article 2(2) of the instant arrangement, to the Plaintiff. The phrase “the amount of 15% deduction to the Austria” written at the end is merely a reference to the Plaintiff that the sales amount equivalent to 15% of the sales amount to be paid to the Plaintiff as the royalty for performing performance against the Austria original author is more preferentially paid to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant agreed amount”).
The Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion is that “15% deduction is made in Austria” means that the Plaintiff transfers 10% of the amount obtained by deducting the loan amount and the performance license fee for the Austria original author from the sales, and such determination was premised on the calculation of the amount of the instant agreement based on the profits, not on the sales amount.
Therefore, the agreed amount claim should be calculated on the basis of the net profit that deducts the actual expenditure cost, and there is no agreed amount to be paid because the actual expenditure cost is 4.6 billion won.
Judgment
If the authenticity of a disposal document is recognized, it shall be objectively interpreted that the parties have expressed their intent in accordance with the terms and conditions stated in the disposal document, unless there are any special circumstances, and there is any difference between the parties on the interpretation of the contract.