손해배상금
The Defendants jointly share KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff, as well as 6% per annum from May 16, 2015 to June 15, 2016.
Facts of recognition
Around February 5, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a credit card use agreement with the Defendants operating a restaurant (F library; hereinafter “instant restaurant”) located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E in the name of his spouse, and the main contents are as follows:
(hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract”). 2. Support for the SOS Sales System (hereinafter referred to as the “POS system”) and CCTV installation: 50 won per each store transaction.
3. The effective and effective term of this Agreement shall be used for three years from the date on which the Defendants and the Plaintiff signed and sealed, and the contract term shall be automatically extended under the same conditions as one year from the expiration date when either of the parties does not intend to terminate in writing one month prior to the expiration date.
Support for learning during the contract period
4. The Defendants shall, without agreement with the Plaintiff in writing, compensate the Plaintiff for all expenses incurred by the Plaintiff in the contract to the Defendants within 30 days from the date of the contract breach.
Compensation shall be twice the support matters.
5. The Defendants to terminate the contract and the Plaintiff may terminate the contract in any of the following cases:
① In the event that one party violates or does not implement the main contents of this Agreement (hereinafter omitted), the Plaintiff, accordingly, installed a spos system and CCTV on the instant restaurant. However, the Defendants used the said spos system only until March 1, 2015, and thereafter used another company’s spos system.
On March 19, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendants of the termination of the instant contract, and demanded the Plaintiff to pay KRW 29,319,800 equivalent to twice the cost of installation subsidized.
[Grounds for recognition] In light of the facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 4, and Eul 1's each entry, and the purport of the whole pleadings, the defendants are liable for damages under Article 3 of the contract of this case.