울산지방법원 2020.02.06 2018나27102

손해배상 등 청구의 소


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.


1. The reasoning of the court of the first instance’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for the addition of the following, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The following shall be added to the part to be added, sixhh in the judgment of the first instance.

The Plaintiff asserted that the termination of the contract of this case on the ground of the Plaintiff’s breach of contract is invalid, since the Plaintiff did not sell goods to the customers without going through the Defendant’s account and did not notify the Defendant of the termination of the contract in writing. However, according to the overall purport of the Plaintiff’s evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the Plaintiff’s violation of Article 10 of the contract of this case, the Plaintiff’s receipt of the notice of termination of the contract from the Defendant on December 29, 2017, and the fact that the Defendant did not indicate the fact of violation of the contract of this case on the certificate (Evidence No. 10) sent by the Plaintiff after the termination of the contract of this case does not interfere with the above recognition, and there is no other counter-proof (the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 4 was made by the merchants or employees of the Defendant’s Mart or the employees of the Defendant, and thus, it cannot be trusted as it is.

Even if such circumstance alone makes it difficult to deem that the evidence No. 4 was made false and cannot be believed.

3) Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion on this part is rejected, and the following is added to the seventh day of the judgment of the first instance.

On this basis, the plaintiff is entrusted with the sale of goods between the plaintiff and the defendant.