공과금 및 월세미납요금등
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1. Purport of the claim.
1. The Plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of damages amounting to KRW 7.5 million under Article 7 subparag. 3 of the consignment contract, ① totaling commission fees and operating expenses, ② totaling KRW 2,126,477, and ② totaling KRW 7.5 million.
The court of first instance accepted the claim of KRW 2,126,477 and dismissed the claim of KRW 7,50,000.
The Plaintiff appealed against the dismissal of the claim of KRW 7.5 million in the judgment of the first instance court.
(Defendant does not dispute the above obligation to pay KRW 2,126,477). The scope of this Court’s trial is limited to the claim of KRW 7,500,000.
2. Facts of recognition;
A. On July 4, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for entrusted operation with the term of contract from July 11, 2018 to July 10, 2019 with respect to the “F” restaurant operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) under the subparagraph D and E of the building C in Asia-si, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for entrusted operation with the Defendant, setting the deposit amount of KRW 500,000,000,000,000 per month and KRW 1.2 million.
(hereinafter “instant contract”). The instant contract contains the following special terms and conditions:
Article VIISpecial Terms and Conditions
1. Return of deposit for destruction of a contract at the time of unpaid monthly income for two months;
2. Return of the deposit when the contract is cancelled within the contract period;
3. Return of deposit when G franchise is destroyed and business suspension is suspended (X 7.5 million won compensation);
4. Non-contract for double consignment.
5. Repair expenses and purchase expenses in the event of damage to an instrument, and the amount of deposit, if it is inevitable for the defendant to pay or purchase expenses;
B. On November 2018, the Defendant expressed to the Plaintiff an intention to terminate the instant contract with a low-end sales worker, and delivered the instant restaurant around December 2018.
C. On December 18, 2018, the Plaintiff terminated the franchise franchise agreement entered into with H Daejeon Southern Branch, and changed the type of business to “I Asan New Hospital” after receiving the instant restaurant’s delivery to the Defendant.
[Grounds for recognition] Gap 1, 2, 7-1 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Assertion and determination
A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant should operate the restaurant of this case in good faith and restore it to its original state after the contract is terminated.