beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff's assertion
A. In around 2008, the Plaintiff established C, and published C, an online newspaper specializing in the media criticism. On May 2013, the said company concluded an Internet portal site agreement with NAV, and the Plaintiff sold 100% of the company’s shares to the Defendant around the end of 2013.
B. In the process of selling the above company’s shares, the Plaintiff set the purchase price of KRW 265 million to the Defendant, subject to adjustment. The Defendant demanded that the purchase price of shares be adjusted if the purchase price would be substantially opened at the level next to the Naum, which is a NAV News Search and Inspection Leave and another portal site, on October 2013 immediately before the conclusion of the contract. Accordingly, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant on November 15, 2013 by setting the acquisition price of KRW 140 million and received KRW 140 million from the Defendant on November 22, 2013.
C. However, the N.V. did not substantially open the news search system and did not publish such contents. D.
The defendant deceivings the plaintiff that he calls for a senior executive officer of N.V. and from time to time and that the N.V.'s news search leave will be widely opened, and therefore, the contract was concluded by significantly lowering the sale price between the plaintiff and the plaintiff. Accordingly, the plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to KRW 125 million (=265 billion-140 million), which is the difference between the previous contract price and the actual purchase price, (i.e., KRW 265 million).
E. Therefore, the Plaintiff seek against the Defendant for the payment of KRW 25 million, which is a part of the damages on the ground of tort, and damages for delay.
2. At the time of the Defendant’s acquisition of the shares of the Company C from the Plaintiff, the fact that the Plaintiff mentioned the opening of the news search system by the Plaintiff does not conflict between the parties. Meanwhile, according to the record of the evidence No. 1, the NAV opened the news search system on October 13, 2013.