logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.04.11 2018나64182
보증금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is 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. Basic facts

A. On March 3, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the E in the instant marina (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) that operated the DMaart on the Macro and the first floor (hereinafter “instant E”).

The contents of the instant lease agreement include ① 12 months from the date of the lease contract, ② 30 million won as lease deposit, and ③ 8% of the sales amount, considering the characteristics of Maart, it was paid by deducting 8% of the rent from the purchase price of the goods purchased from E E in the Maccop, and then returning the settlement amount to the Plaintiff.

B. Meanwhile, on April 1, 2015, the Defendant was the obligee E, and entered into a business transfer agreement with E on the instant marina (hereinafter “instant business transfer agreement”) around April 1, 2015, where the claim is not recovered.

After taking over the instant marina business, the Defendant changed the trade name of the instant marina to “FE”, but this changed its trade name in its business registration, and the external signboard of the instant marina was used as it is before.

C. However, notwithstanding the business transfer contract of this case, the defendant was employed as employee E, and the person who actually manages the business in this case was still E.

Accordingly, E still continued to pay the settlement money to the Plaintiff after deducting the difference from the sales amount of Maccop, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not have any time.

On August 2015, the Plaintiff expressed to E the intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the grounds of poor sales.

E, while consenting thereto, agreed to return the Plaintiff’s right to the Plaintiff’s right to the Plaintiff’s right to the Plaintiff’s right to the reimbursement of KRW 30 million as the profit accrued from the Plaintiff’s direct management.

E. The Plaintiff on January 2015

arrow