beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the court makes a dismissal or add a judgment similar to that of paragraph (2) as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
On the 3rd page of the first instance judgment, “The amount of damages sustained by the plaintiff, as property damage, KRW 188,952,543 out of the total operating cost of the plaintiff during the restaurant operation of this case (i.e., total sales amount of KRW 337,461,343 - total sales amount of KRW 148,508,80), and ② KRW 10,000,000 of consolation money due to the plaintiff’s emotional distress. Therefore, the defendants jointly are liable to pay to the plaintiff 198,952,543 and delay damages therefrom.”
The amount of damages for the Plaintiff’s property is KRW 153,920,00 in total (i.e., the amount of damages 85,520,00 won due to the establishment of a franchise store (i.e., the amount of damages 64,400,000 won for the remaining lease period after the closure of the restaurant of this case). Therefore, the Defendants are jointly obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 153,920,000 and damages for delay thereof (i.e., the amount of damages for the restaurant of this case). Therefore, the Defendants are jointly obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 153,920,000 and damages for delay thereof (i.e., the amount of damages 85,520,000 won due to the establishment of the franchise store of this case) from January 2015 to June 2015. However, according to the results of the Defendant’s reply from July 9, 2018 to June 23, 16, 2015.
2. Additional determination
A. The gist of the parties’ assertion is that the Defendants provided information on G’s earnings only verbally, not in writing, and this does not exceed the Fair Transactions in Franchise Business Act.