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 Plaintiff’s assertion is a brokerage agency in charge of L, M, and N’s Internet subscription business and management business. The Plaintiff entered into an agreement with O, an individual sales store, to pay fees to O when it solicits customers who use the above three services. During the process of attracting customers, the private goods that the Plaintiff may pay to the customer are limited to KRW 200,000 and KRW 70,000,000,000 in cash received from the radio operator, and the Plaintiff notified the same to theO.
Nevertheless, O made a proposal to the Defendants, a customer, that “two months have passed after joining the Defendants, additional payment of KRW 450,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,0000 won, if they were to use N only in the three months, and to move to the existing communications company, and immediately pay them in cash and merchandise coupons.” As the Defendants consented, the Defendants provided that “the Defendants are not subject to additional goods in the event of a piracy call from the service center or brokerage agency,” and the Defendants covered the terms of the payment of goods after receiving a piracy call from the Plaintiff. The above acts by the Defendants andO constitute tort against the Plaintiff.
On the other hand, the Defendants entered into a contract with three companies of communication with the O for the business purposes, but terminated the above contract within six months from the date of entry, and the Plaintiff was recovered from the three companies of communication for cash and fees paid to the Defendants.
Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount stated in the claim and damages for delay, which are the amount equivalent to cash and fees recovered in three copies of communications, due to tort damages.
2. In this case, the plaintiff is suffering from the plaintiff's naval call call from O while the defendant decided to join the three services of communications company with O's business.