Text
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On July 6, 2016, the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 27,00,000,00, including “logistics business expenses and business promotion expenses” as the sales price for a vehicle, when concluding an entrustment contract under which the Plaintiff purchased a truck from the Defendant Company by purchasing the truck from the Defendant Company, and by entering this into the name of the Defendant Company and operating the transportation business (hereinafter “instant contract”).
B. After entering into the instant contract, the Plaintiff paid KRW 26,300,000 in total as the Plaintiff was sold in lots the D 1 ton truck (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).
C. In July 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant Company that the Defendant Company could not run the transport business on the ground that the Plaintiff could not run the transport business on the ground that the Defendant Company was different from the original working conditions, while receiving education for the transport business under the instant contract.
[Ground of recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence 1 through 5, 8, 9, 10, Eul evidence 1 through 9 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the main claim
A. The Plaintiff entered into the instant contract with Defendant B, an employee of the Defendant Company, prior to the conclusion of the instant contract, who was an employee of the Defendant Company, to hear that working hours are not night but night, and that all oil expenses are subsidized.
However, the working conditions that the Plaintiff came to know after that, if the annual operating cost of oil at all night work is lower than the official annual fee, the difference was the condition that the Plaintiff bears.
The Plaintiff entered into the instant contract by deceiving Defendant B’s working conditions, and thus, Defendant B is liable for damages arising from tort, and Defendant B bears the employer’s responsibility as the employer.
The scope of compensation for damages is the actual special equipment from 12,00,000 won which the Defendants received as the special equipment among the sales price of the instant vehicle from the Plaintiff.