logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.07.12 2017나1053
약정금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

Reasons

1. In fact, on March 26, 2016, the Plaintiff concluded a commercial building lease premium contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant on the D cafeteria located in C (hereinafter “instant cafeteria”), and the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff KRW 17,00,000 to the Plaintiff for facility costs, and KRW 5,00,000,000 on March 28, 2016, and to pay the remainder by receiving a loan from a micro enterprise.

However, the defendant did not pay the plaintiff KRW 6,000,000 among the above facility costs until now.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, and the purport of Gap's evidence No. 1 and all pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff transferred all of the instant stores and goodwill to the defendant under the contract of this case, but the defendant did not pay KRW 6,000,000 among the facility expenses. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the above KRW 6,000,000 and delay damages therefor to the plaintiff.

B. It is true that the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff received the instant store from the Plaintiff in accordance with the instant contract. However, it is difficult to use the facilities and equipment that the Plaintiff acquired from the Plaintiff, or that the period of business closure falls under six months even though the Plaintiff’s period of business closure falls under one year, and even if there was no other contractor, the Defendant did not have the obligation to pay the Plaintiff premium.

3. Determination

A. In the advertisement of the product, if the specific facts about the important matters of the transaction are falsely notified in a manner that is to be criticized in light of the duty of good faith, it constitutes a deception. However, the mere exaggeration in the advertisement is accompanied by a certain exaggeration in the advertisement is not sufficient to the extent possible in light of the general commercial practice and the good faith principle. In addition, in the case of the purchase of a specific special facility, its operation will be done and its profits will be how much.

arrow