beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.11.01 2016가단103552

약정금

Text

1. Each of the plaintiffs' claims is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 10, 2016, the Plaintiffs entered into a contract with the Defendant to lease KRW 802-1 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) of KRW 100 million ( KRW 10 million as the first down payment, KRW 10 million as the second down payment, KRW 30 million as of January 11, 2016; KRW 30 million as of February 15, 2016; KRW 50 million as of February 15, 2016; and KRW 450,000 as of the monthly rent (excluding value-added tax); and KRW 450,000 as of the date of commencement of construction as lessee (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).

B. Pursuant to the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiffs paid each of the Defendant KRW 10 million on January 10, 2016 and KRW 10 million on November 11, 2016, respectively, as down payment.

C. On January 23, 2016, the Plaintiffs concluded a franchise agreement with Lone Star Korea Co., Ltd. to operate Accenture sales store in the leased object of the instant case, and paid to Lone Star Korea Co., Ltd. KRW 500,000,000 and KRW 1,000,000,000 for franchise fees.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including branch numbers for those with branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. On February 13, 2016, the Defendant’s employees G’s summary of the Plaintiffs’ assertion was unable to operate an Accenture sales store in the leased object of this case, and the Defendant’s employees paid a double of the down payment as penalty, and proposed as text messages the rescission of the instant lease agreement. The Plaintiffs consented thereto.

Therefore, inasmuch as the instant lease agreement was rescinded on February 13, 2016 by the foregoing agreement, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiffs a penalty of KRW 40 million and damages for delay.

3. Determination

A. The termination of the agreement of the relevant legal doctrine is another contract with the content of generating the same effect as the Party had not already concluded the contract.