2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The Defendant is a corporation operating “F” (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) in the commercial building located in E in the net city of 1,000.

B. On July 15, 2011, the Plaintiff and the Defendant sold food in a specific store among the instant commercial buildings (hereinafter “Plaintiff shop”) and concluded a specific purchase contract (hereinafter “instant contract contract”) with the purport that the Defendant would pay the sales price, excluding commission and all necessary expenses. The contract was extended thereafter and the contract was terminated on June 2018 by the Defendant’s termination.

C. The Plaintiff shop has used electricity appliances, etc. for cooking food, and the Defendant has paid the Plaintiff the amount calculated by deducting electricity charges, in addition to fees and management expenses, from the sales price during the instant contract period.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 14, and 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that there was no agreement to deduct the electricity fee from the Plaintiff’s assertion, and because the electricity fee included in the fee, the electricity fee should not be deducted separately.

In addition, since Article 6 (1) of the Act on Fair Transactions in Large Franchise and Retail Business (hereinafter "Large Franchise and Retail Business Act") and Article 2 (6) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act do not prepare and give written notice of the imposition of electricity charges, the imposition of electricity charges constitutes unjust enrichment.

The amount of electricity indicated in the e-mail photographs (No. 1-4) presented by the Defendant is 54,732 kw, and the above photographs were taken after the Plaintiff delivered the store. According to the photographs taken around July 4, 2018, the amount of electricity generated by the Plaintiff is 49,633 kw, and the amount of electricity generated by the Plaintiff should not exceed the above value. According to the documents presented by the Defendant, the electricity used in excess of the above value was used.