logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.12.19 2017가단16188
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. C performed a restaurant in the name of “E” among the five-story buildings located in the Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, which are owned by the Defendant, on a deposit of 4 million won and monthly rent of 2.4 million won. The Plaintiff worked as a cook of the above restaurant.

B. The Plaintiff leased C totaling KRW 3.5 million between June 11, 2013 and July 2015.

C. On July 9, 2016, the Plaintiff knew that C intended to transfer the restaurant, and C requested C to repay performance, and C received a “certificate of participation at the time of the contract” from the Defendant, which read, “B, upon renewal of the contract, has verified C, A, and B’s promise to give E to be present at the attendance of the other party, and then, issued to C the Plaintiff with signature and seal at the time of the contract.”

On December 2016, the Defendant stated that the Plaintiff, who was found to have discontinued the above restaurant business, was waiting to believe himself.

E. However, on May 23, 2017, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with a third party and received a lease deposit from a new lessee and returned the lease deposit to C. C was paid KRW 3 million from a new lessee.

F. Although the Defendant promised to allow the Plaintiff to attend the Plaintiff at the time of receiving the lease deposit, the Defendant was obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the Plaintiff’s failure to perform the said promise, thereby preventing the Plaintiff from recovering the claim from C.

G. or the Defendant’s failure to notify the Plaintiff of the attendance, thereby having C enter into a contract for transfer and takeover of a restaurant with a third party in the future following the Plaintiff’s death and collect the full amount of the premium and the lease deposit, is a tort that interferes with the Plaintiff’s legitimate exercise of rights by soliciting or aiding and abetting the evasion of the obligation of C.

h. Preliminary collection of claims due to the Defendant’s default or tort.

arrow