logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.10.23 2017가단111526
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 16, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a franchise agreement with the Defendant for the operation of the coffee chain (hereinafter “instant franchise agreement”).

B. In entering into the instant franchise agreement, the Plaintiff and the Defendant prepared an estimate/agreement with the amount of construction cost of KRW 285,00,000 (hereinafter “instant estimate/agreement”), and the said estimate/agreement included basic construction work (114,884,718), signboards and private persons (17,45,560 won), external construction work (9,121,560 won), machinery and equipment, and tablers (114,58,333 won), first aid equipment, and small items (13,979,829 won), franchise (10,000,000 won), contract performance guarantee (5,00,000 won).

C. On March 5, 2013, the Defendant entered into a separate contract for the interior works of Liberian Co., Ltd. and the instant store at KRW 81,290,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”) with respect to the interior works of the instant store (hereinafter “C”), and accordingly, Liberian Co., Ltd. entered into the interior works of “C Points.”

The Plaintiff paid the price in full in accordance with the instant estimate/agreement and operated the instant store, and transferred the instant store to D on April 29, 2015 KRW 310,000,000.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 2-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the Plaintiff’s assertion and Fair Transactions in Franchise Business Act (hereinafter “Franchising Business Act”), a franchising party shall perform its respective duties in good faith while running a franchising business. Although a franchisor is obligated to install store facilities at reasonable prices and expenses to a franchisee, the Defendant entered into a double construction contract in violation of the aforementioned provisions of the Franchising Business Act, and without registration of construction business.

arrow