beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.01.12 2016나2026585

용역비

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. The Plaintiff’s alleged work content company’s sample production-related to the production of the Plaintiff’s advertising materials at Kentent Kentent’s 86,900,000 65,664,000 Compilation/recordingF company (D) 60,766,200 Synthetic G company (E),894,200 11,200,000 H company (Plaintiff) (Plaintiff) with 10,000,000 10,000 cent Company (Plaintiff) with the production of advertising materials at Kentent’s 20,000,000 cents cents 20,000,000 cents 20,000 cents 20,000,000 cents 195,560,1010,196, 2019, etc. cent’s work agreement with each of the Plaintiff’s employees.

Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay approximately KRW 120,00,000 to the Plaintiff, including the part of Kententson’s service, for the entire service.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination as to the determination as to the party to a service contract 1) Where an actor who enters into a contract performs a legal act in the name of another person, in relation to whom the actor or the title holder is the party to the contract, the actor or the title holder shall be determined as the party to the contract in accordance with the consent of the actor, if the intent of the other party is in accord. In the event that the intent of both parties is not in accord, determination as to whom the other party would understand between the actor and the title holder as the party to the contract should be made on the basis of the specific circumstances before and after the conclusion of the contract, including the nature, content, purpose, circumstances, etc. of the contract (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2015Da240768, Mar. 10, 2016; 97Da53045, May 15, 1998).