logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.10.26 2016가단224678
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

Basic Facts

가. 피고 B은 ‘D’이라는 상호로 짬뽕 등 음식점에 관한 가맹사업(이하 ‘이 사건 가맹사업’이라 한다)을 운영하는 사업자이다.

Defendant C is practically operating the franchise business of this case with the husband of Defendant B.

B. Around May 14, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a franchise agreement with Defendant B, stating that the Plaintiff would operate “E” as a franchise business operator of the instant franchise business (hereinafter “instant franchise agreement”).

C. On June 15, 2015, pursuant to the instant franchise agreement, the Plaintiff operated the business of operating E (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) on the Seo-gu F Ground Building, Seo-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) and closed the business on September 6, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements, Gap's evidence Nos. 8, 35, 49 through 51, 54, and 60, plaintiff's assertion of the purport of whole pleadings

A. At the time of entering into the instant franchise agreement, the Defendants: (a) provided the Plaintiff with false and exaggerated information that the net profit of G operated by the Defendants was KRW 700 to eight million per month; and (b) induced the Plaintiff; and (c) caused the Plaintiff to enter into the instant franchise agreement.

The above false and exaggerated information provided by the Defendants is an act in violation of Article 9(1)1 of the Fair Transactions in Franchise Business Act and a tort.

B. In addition, in operating the restaurant of this case, the Defendants did not provide the Plaintiff with sufficient information through market research and market analysis in selecting the location of the restaurant of this case, and violated the duty of disclosure or protection under the good faith principle by neglecting education and training for the Plaintiff.

C. In addition, H, upon entering into the instant franchise agreement, knew the Plaintiff by providing the Plaintiff with false or exaggerated information that the net profit of G operated by the Defendants was KRW 7 million per month.

The Defendants are to enter into the instant franchise agreement with H.

arrow