logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.11.11 2020가합15471
용역비
Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant, as a proxy of recruiting members of the E Regional Housing Association (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Regional Housing Association”) that carries out a regional housing association project within the Doable District (Dable block), was engaged in recruiting members of the F Apartment Housing District (hereinafter referred to as “regional housing association”) around 2018.

B. From July 9, 2018 to November 2018, the Plaintiff, as the Defendant’s business director, worked in F apartment site and managed the business management of employees and membership recruitment contracts.

C. The Defendant paid 300,000 won per household recruited by partners during the service period to the Plaintiff. The Defendant recruited a total of 802 households as partners.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff would pay the Plaintiff the service cost of KRW 300,000 per household recruited by members during the service period, twice a month.

The plaintiff's service cost was 240,600,000 won for 802 households recruited during the service period, which was 23,000,000 won among them.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the remaining service cost of KRW 217,600,000 and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. As to the time of payment of the Defendant’s alleged service charges, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the fee upon receiving the secondary fee from the regional housing association.

The period during which the local housing association agreed to pay the service cost to the Plaintiff has not yet arrived because it was unable to receive the service cost.

3. Determination

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant make different arguments concerning the period during which the payment of service costs is due, and this is related to this.

According to Gap evidence Nos. 2 and Eul evidence Nos. 10, 2018, July 2, 2018 (3 million won, three million won), September 2, 2018 (2 million won, three million won), October 2, 2018 (2 million won, three million won), November 1, 2018 (3 million won), January 1, 2018 (3 million won), January 1, 2019 (3 million won), and January 3 million won (3 million won), and September 2019 (3 million won).

arrow