beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a non-corporate body that operates an alternative school under the name of “E school,” and requested F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) to change the English language education course for students of “E” (hereinafter “Plaintiff students”) in order to conduct the English language education course for students of “E” (hereinafter “E”)
B. Since then, around December 17, 2013, the Plaintiff introduced G schools located in the Philippines from F and the Plaintiff entered into an entrustment contract for fish education (hereinafter “instant agency contract”) with the Plaintiff 45 students from December 23, 2013 to March 2, 2014, with the content that the Plaintiff would receive the language education training in G schools from the Plaintiff 45 students. As such, the Plaintiff entered into the entrustment contract for fish education (hereinafter “instant agency contract”).
C. From March 2013 to December 201 of the same year, the Plaintiff paid KRW 317,632,00,000, including KRW 270,000,000, in accordance with the instant agency contract.
On the other hand, H, the representative director of F, introduced G school to the Plaintiff before entering into the instant agency contract, provided that “G school is an excellent school that allows students who graduated from this school as an international school, not a fish driving school, to study in the U.S., and a dormitory is established on the third floor of the school. The teachers of this school are 21 instructors who were from the Switzerland International University and are in charge of the said language training. G school explained that “A school is legally permitted by the education authorities of the Switzerland to conduct the language training.”
E. Around December 23, 2013, the Plaintiff led 45 students on the part of the Plaintiff, and did not complete the dormitory facilities at the time of arrival in G schools located in the Philippines, and there was a dispute between the Plaintiff, C, and D, the operator of the G school. In the process, Defendant C, and D paid only KRW 60 million out of the training cost to the Plaintiff.