2015Na26060 Advertising proceeds

MM Media Co., Ltd.

A

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Da61607 Decided March 31, 2015

December 16, 2015

January 13, 2016

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

1. Purport of claim

3,5310,000 won and damages for delay.

2. Purport of appeal

Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff falling under any of the following subparagraphs shall be revoked: 9.57 million won and damages for delay.

Defendant: Cancellation of the part against Defendant in the judgment of the first instance, and dismissal of Plaintiff’s claim corresponding to the cancellation part.

The reasons for the judgment of this court are as follows (the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act): Provided, That it shall be written in the following manner:

1. The judgment of the court of first instance shall be made in the following order from the third to the 15th to the nineth, on the 9th, respectively:

[Supplementary Use]

In addition, the Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff should additionally pay KRW 4,950,000 for the first time of the article of sports club, ② for the first time of the article of sports club, ③ for the first time of the article of sports club, KRW 3,300,00, ③ for the second time of the design of the franchise, KRW 1,100,000 for the second time of the design of the franchise, ④ for the first time of the closure of the event, the Plaintiff claimed as additional damages due to the Defendant’s unilateral termination, or for the condition that the contract of this case is maintained for one year, and thus, the Defendant should additionally pay the amount.

First, we examine the assertion of additional damages. In the event that the parties have scheduled the amount of damages between themselves, the obligee may only claim the expected amount of damages, as well as the estimated amount of damages, and barring any special agreement, the obligee cannot claim the amount of damages exceeding the estimated amount of damages, barring any specific agreement. In the case of this case, the agreement to pay the Plaintiff the expenses for a period of three months from the termination date as penalty in the case of cancellation due to the Defendant’s unique circumstances is as seen earlier. Such agreement of penalty is presumed to be the estimate of the amount of damages (Article 398(4) of the Civil Act). In the event of liquidated damages, unless otherwise stipulated, the obligee cannot claim the amount of damages exceeding the estimated amount of damages. The part of the Plaintiff’s claim for additional

Next, there is no evidence to acknowledge the assertion that the Plaintiff’s money was paid on the condition that the instant publicity agency contract is maintained for one year.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for this part cannot be accepted.

2. At the third bottom of the judgment of the court of first instance, the references to the references to the references to the references to the references to the references to the references to the references to the references to the references to the references to 1 to 9.

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

Judges Park Jae-young

Judges Lee Jin-hoon

Judges Jeong-ho