logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원(제주) 2017.05.10 2016나389
객실사용료등
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

A. On June 19, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a guest room use contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant guest room use contract”).

Contract term: guest rooms - From August 1, 2014 to July 31, 2015: 60 guest rooms - Type of guest rooms - The defendant (including value-added tax) deposit amounting to KRW 65,000 (including value-added tax) at one room shall be deposited at the same time with the contract of the plaintiff (A).

General Provisions

2. The plaintiff shall provide the defendant with BLOCK with no problem unless it is an increase in the number of business activities inside the building.

3. The plaintiff approves that the defendant transferred or taken over the guest room to another travel agency.

4. The plaintiff shall ensure that the number of guest rooms and prices completed by the BLOCK are preferentially guaranteed to the defendant.

5. The guest room BLOCK shall be 60 rooms a day and shall, in principle, issue a monthly tax invoice by the plaintiff;

Provided, That it may be adjusted later through mutual consultation.

6. The plaintiff deals with the sales of guest rooms, regardless of whether they are used, and claims the defendant for the sales of guest rooms by the contract duration, and the defendant shall pay it to the defendant.

8. If the term of no less than 15 days has passed without mutual agreement on the case of the payment of guest room usage fees, the contract shall be null and void, and the plaintiff shall not be held responsible for the remainder of the contract.

9. If the plaintiff or defendant unilaterally changes the contract, the penalty shall be paid twice the deposit.

10. Deposit shall be subtracted from the passenger fee to the defendant at the time of expiration of the contract.

B. On June 5, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff on June 5, 2015 that the Plaintiff would pay the price only to the guest rooms actually used since June 6, 2015, as a situation in which Chinese travelers cancel the travel.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion.

arrow