(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.02.13 2018나2042529

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) 서울고등법원 2019.02.13 2018나2042529

위탁수수료등 청구

Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Facts recognized;

A. The status of the parties (1) Plaintiff B, C, I, J, K, L, S, U, V, W, and X (hereinafter referred to as “the Plaintiff’s head”) was the Defendant’s regional headquarters HM (Head Off Meer, next hereinafter “the head”), and Plaintiff N, AB (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff’s designer”) was the Defendant’s regional headquarters LC (hereinafter referred to as “designer”).

The Plaintiffs, who are not the Defendant’s employees, were in charge of attracting and managing customers entrusted by the Defendant.

(2) The Defendant was a corporation with the purpose of funeral service, commercial operation, etc., whose original trade name was “AI corporation” and changed into the current trade name on November 14, 2013.

B. (1) The head of the Plaintiff’s headquarters (A) entered into a sales and consignment management contract with the Defendant between 2013 and 24 February 2016 (hereinafter “instant consignment management contract”). The head of the Plaintiff claims as the content of the instant headquarters consignment management contract with the Defendant on February 24, 2016, and there is no particular difference between the contract with the Defendant on February 14, 2016 and the terms of the contract previously made.

Therefore, instead of mentioning the content of partial provisions on convenience, the content of the contract of February 24, 2016 is recognized as the content of the entrusted management contract of the headquarters of this case.

Around that time, the defendant was commissioned as the chief of the headquarters.

Article 1 and Article 2 (Scope of Entrusted Affairs) A company under Article 3 (Scope of Entrusted Affairs) shall entrust the affairs falling under each of the following subparagraphs to the head of the headquarters:

1. Affairs concerning the attraction of customers and affairs incidental thereto;

2. Education, education, and management of salespersons within the scope of approval of a company;

3. Business of customer satisfaction services for the customers of a company: (1) through (3) of Article 4 (Performance of Entrusted Services)

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.17 2015가단5342599

-서울고등법원 2019.07.26 2018나2046750

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.05 2016가합567953

-서울서부지방법원 2021.04.30 2019가단216056

-서울고등법원 2018.10.05 2017나2028823