logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.06.14 2018가단58616
손해배상 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) is about 35,000.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a franchisor that engages in franchise business with the business mark "C," and the defendant is a person who has entered into a franchise agreement with the plaintiff.

B. Upon soliciting the Plaintiff to establish a “C” franchise store, the Defendant paid KRW 5 million to the Plaintiff as the down payment on September 19, 2018, and entered into a franchise agreement with the Plaintiff on September 26, 2018, and paid KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff on September 27, 2018.

C. Upon entering into the instant franchise agreement on September 26, 2018, the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with an information disclosure statement prescribed by the Fair Transactions in Franchise Business Act (hereinafter “Franchising Business Act”) and, however, entered the information disclosure statement in the receipt certificate as “ September 10, 2018.”

On October 10, 2018, the Defendant sent a DNA message to the Plaintiff to seek the termination of the instant franchise agreement and the refund of KRW 35 million already paid. On October 17, 2018, the Defendant sent a proof of the content of seeking the termination of the instant franchise agreement and the refund of KRW 35 million of the franchise fee.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 10, Eul evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) unilaterally terminated the instant franchise agreement with a sudden and simple change, and thereby, the Plaintiff suffered loss.

(2) The amount of damages that the Defendant is liable to pay to the Plaintiff is ① Articles 50(1) and 50(2) of the instant franchise agreement (such as penalty for breach of contract before opening the opening point) ① When the term “B” is terminated by simple changes in the judgment of “B” before opening the opening point, “B” (the Defendant) shall pay the following penalty to “A” (Plaintiff).

From 30% of the deposit before the date of termination of the contract, 80% of the deposit before the date of the contract, 30% of the deposit after the date of termination of the contract, 80% of the deposit before the open contract.

arrow