logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.05.29 2018가단232101
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

On December 28, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease contract for the business of gas stations located in the Incheon Cheongjin-gun, Incheon, under which the Plaintiff and the Defendant delayed performance of the duty to deliver gas stations for two years or two years as well as the duty to deliver gas stations, which was set on January 1, 2016, which was the time limit for delivery by the lessor, and which was set on May 1, 2016 as the date of commencement of sole operation of the Plaintiff. The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff is liable to pay penalty (amount to the contract deposit) 30,000,000 won.

However, since there is no proof of the plaintiff as to the defendant's default, the above assertion is not reasonable.

As the Plaintiff provided labor to the Defendant as a gas station employee from January 1, 2016 to May 2, 2018, the Plaintiff’s claim for wages of 72,768,080 won for 28 months ( = 118,130 won per day of urban daily wage x 28 months).

Although there is no dispute over the fact that the plaintiff provided labor during the above period, the defendant has paid the full amount.

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the statement in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 46, the defendant's completion of payment can be recognized by paying 28 million won per month to the plaintiff, including wages.

While recognizing the fact that the Plaintiff received 28 million won each month, the Plaintiff did not receive the said money as the remuneration for work, and asserted that it was a profit distribution amount, there is no counter-proof by the Plaintiff to reverse the above fact of recognition.

Considering the fact that the Plaintiff initially asserted that the amount of KRW 5 million paid for each month was the amount of work.

(3) The defendant's defense is reasonable and the plaintiff's above assertion is also erroneous. The plaintiff's defense is also erroneous.

The plaintiff's claim is rejected.

arrow