(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2020.12.22 2019가단214759

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2020.12.22 2019가단214759

손해배상(기)

Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On February 19, 2019, the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion entered into an interim management contract under which the Defendant, the representative of the malicious company of the malicious company “C”, and the Plaintiff received 300,000 won per month fixed and received 5% of the sales amount as incentives from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”), and paid KRW 50,000 to the Defendant as collateral for the said branch facilities, etc.

However, in fact, since the Defendant had already been unable to pay the goods prices or employees of C companies, it was concluded with the Plaintiff without the intent or ability to pay fixed benefits or incentives, and even if not, the instant contract was terminated due to the closure of the branch office.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 50 million due to the restitution of damages caused by tort or due to the termination of the contract.

2. The following circumstances revealed in the statement in the evidence Nos. 1 to 6 of the judgment, namely, the above C was actually operated by the Defendant, and the Plaintiff was not present at the time of the contract of this case, and the Defendant filed a complaint against E by fraud, fabrication of private documents, etc., the contract of this case (Evidence No. 2-1) submitted by the Plaintiff was sealed without the Defendant’s certificate of personal seal impression attached, and it is impossible to find who is an obstacle. The Defendant lent its name to E as to the contract of this case.

In light of the fact that there is no evidence to deem that there was no evidence to believe that the Plaintiff was delegated the authority to conclude the instant contract, and there is no evidence to deem that the Defendant was involved in the act of defraudation against the Plaintiff regarding the instant contract, the Defendant concluded the instant contract with the Plaintiff solely on the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff or

(b).

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2018.09.12 2018나20002

-서울남부지방법원 2018.02.06 2016가단245214

-인천지방법원 2015.09.23 2015가단18762

-수원지방법원 2020.10.14 2019나70698

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.05 2016가합567953