logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.06.15 2017가단534370
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On February 7, 2014, the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) leased D aquaculture located in Jeonnam-gun, Jeonnam-gun, and two parcels (hereinafter “instant aquaculture”); (b) at that time, the Plaintiff cultivated the spaw at the instant aquaculture three times; (c) decided to purchase the instant aquaculture; and (d) if the Plaintiff fails to purchase the instant aquaculture, the Defendant would take over all the facilities.

On December 12, 2016, the Plaintiff trusted these agreements, invested in facility costs, etc., and the instant form of culture was to be sold after December 31, 2017, despite the terms and conditions of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant sold the instant form of culture to E on November 15, 2017, the former owner.

After the Defendant violated the agreement as above and sold the instant model to a third party, demanding the Plaintiff to restore all the facilities installed by the Plaintiff to its original state in the instant model constitutes an intentional act, and thereby, the Plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to the cost of installing the facilities.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay 20,000,100 won, which is a part of the costs invested by the plaintiff, as compensation for damages.

Since the Defendant agreed to acquire all the facilities installed in the aquaculture after the termination of the lease agreement on the instant aquaculture, this constitutes nonperformance of obligation, and the Plaintiff sustained damages equivalent to the cost of installing the relevant facilities. Therefore, the Defendant is liable to compensate for KRW 20,000,100, which is a part of the cost.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, 2, 2, and 4, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on February 7, 2014, setting the lease term as two years from February 7, 2014 to February 7, 2016 with respect to the instant aquaculture, and 490M (PE400) and water purifiers as special terms and conditions at the time.

arrow