logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2019.12.10 2018가단101223
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff inflicted damage on the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff should compensate for damages equivalent to the total cost paid by the Plaintiff in relation to the instant franchise agreement pursuant to Article 750 of the Civil Act and interest for delay.

(2) Determination Gap evidence Nos. 5, 10 through 16, 25, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including each number), witness G testimony added to the overall purport of pleadings, i.e., circumstances that are acknowledged as follows: ① The plaintiff unilaterally notified the defendant's employees of the establishment of a studio and a studio to the plaintiff's shop without installing a studio, etc.; however, the circumstance that the defendant introduced the defendant's employee who installed and operated a studio studio on behalf of the studio to the fact that there is no other ground to recognize it; ② The studio supply contract of this case states that "The 2ndroudio 4 in relation to the construction contents of the studio 2ndo, "the 0th unit of this case, * the 2nd unit of the studio / the 1st unit of the studio / the 1st unit of the 2nd unit of the studio."

arrow