logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.03 2014가단119469
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit, the part pertaining to the participation in the litigation is the intervenor joining the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On June 14, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a franchise insurance contract with the Defendant to guarantee the payment of damages liability owed by the Defendant to the Intervenor based on the following three equipped range of devices (hereinafter “this case’s guarantee contract”) by setting the insurance coverage amount of KRW 50,000,00, and the insurance coverage period from June 15, 2012 to July 27, 2015, between the Defendant and the Defendant.

On June 21, 2012, the Defendant entered into a franchise franchise agreement (hereinafter “instant franchise agreement”) with the Intervenor to operate the instant convenience store by using the convenience store system developed by the Intervenor at the convenience store (hereinafter “instant convenience store”) and agreed to return KRW 7,500,000, which was paid by C, the former occupant of the instant convenience store, at the time of termination of the agreement with the Intervenor.

According to the instant guarantee agreement, “the Defendant shall pay insurance proceeds to the insured by failing to perform the Defendant’s obligation or obligation guaranteed by the Plaintiff. When the Plaintiff pays the insurance proceeds to the insured, the Defendant shall pay the insurance proceeds immediately.” The general terms and conditions applicable to the instant guarantee agreement provide that “the Plaintiff shall compensate the insured franchisor (the Defendant) for the damages incurred by the failure of the franchisee (the insured) to perform the obligation stipulated in the franchise agreement stated in the insurance policy.”

(6) Article 6) The Intervenor filed a claim with the Plaintiff for the payment of the insurance money under the instant guarantee agreement, while the Defendant’s failure to perform his/her obligation under the instant franchise agreement to pay damages arising from the termination of the instant franchise agreement, and the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Plaintiff on February 25, 2014.

arrow