beta
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2019.09.20 2018가단65050

위약금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 40,000,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from September 21, 2018 to September 20, 2019, and the following.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition 1-8. (Omission)

9. The transferor shall operate the same private teaching institute or teaching school within 2 km per half year after the transfer of this institute, not engage in the same kind of private teaching institute or other private teaching institute, and shall compensate the assignee twice as much as the premiums already paid in the event of its breach.

except in the case of progress after consultation with the transferee.

On March 14, 2018, the Defendant: (a) operated the Dental Institute (hereinafter “instant Private Teaching Institute”); (b) transferred the right and facilities of the said Institute to the Plaintiff in KRW 28,000,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”); and (c) stipulated the following special agreement (hereinafter “instant special agreement”).

B. The Plaintiff paid the transfer price under the instant contract and operated the instant private teaching institute from March 26, 2018.

C. Around August 2018 to September 2018, the Defendant taught students in Ansan-gu Ebuilding F from the instant private teaching institute, and concluded a card terminal service contract with the name of “H private teaching institute” on November 2018, Ansan-gu G and the second floor located within 2km from the instant private teaching institute.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, each entry or video of Gap evidence 1-9 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the commission of appraisal to the President of the place of origin within the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts found in the existence of the obligation to pay a penalty, the Defendant violated the instant special agreement by teaching students within 2 km from the private teaching institute of this case before the lapse of 2 years from the date of the conclusion of the instant agreement, and thus, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 56,00,000, which is 2 times the premium to be paid.

B. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant’s defense, etc. is not a breach of contract, since the measurement based on the Fhos of the instant driving school building and the E-building building exceeds 2 km.

Domins, Domins, .