logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.10.23 2018나10035
운송료
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. The Plaintiff (former trade name: Hyundai Plastic Co., Ltd.) is a company that carries on transportation business, etc., and the Defendant is a company that carries on the wholesale and retail business of pet goods.

The representative director of the defendant is operating a personal business under the name of the business owner B, which is called "A".

On December 20, 2013, the defendant was established, and B was registered as the defendant's internal director.

B. On September 7, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into an agency contract and a transport contract with C with the following terms and conditions. The purpose of Article 1 is to maintain a smooth contractual relationship by clarifying the basic principles for the agency operation between C and the Plaintiff and faithfully performing their mutual obligations. The name of the agency and the title of the agency under Article 3: ① the entrusted agency name of C is as follows: ② the entrusted agency name of C is as follows: (2) the entrusted agency name of C; (3) the fact that C was designated as the responsible delivery area from the Plaintiff does not mean that C was granted the exclusive right to conduct the collection delivery; and the Plaintiff’s efforts do not constitute damage to C’s business. The scope of the agency under Article 5 (1) is to ensure that C performs the following duties in good faith among the selective cargo transport services concluded with the Plaintiff with the customer; (2) the delivery agency’s new cargo terminal is to perform the delivery work from the consignor’s agent, to the delivery agent’s delivery service; and (3) the delivery agent’s delivery service framework and delivery service.

arrow