(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.07.22 2015나10842

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.07.22 2015나10842

물품대금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the Plaintiff, which orders additional payment, shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a merchant operating the headquarters C of a chain store operating the fireworks delivery brokerage business, and the Defendant is a member who entered into a membership agreement with the Plaintiff on January 31, 2007 (hereinafter “instant franchise agreement”) and entered into between the Plaintiff and the end of October 2010.

B. A transaction under the instant franchise agreement is conducted in the manner that the Plaintiff entered into a franchise agreement with at least 800 fireworks all over the country and any member store requests the Plaintiff (C Headquarters) to deliver fireworks to an area where it is difficult for him/her to deliver. If the Plaintiff requests the delivery to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff shall designate an appropriate member from among the members in the area where the delivery is to be made, and each member shall deliver the fireworks to him/her, and each member shall, as above, request the Plaintiff to deliver fireworks to another area or request the Plaintiff (the order of the Plaintiff) to deliver fireworks to another area (the Plaintiff’s order).

(hereinafter the above transaction between the Plaintiff and the Defendant refers to the instant order transaction).

According to the franchise agreement of this case, if a member is more than the flowers price that the plaintiff requested delivery to a specific member every month, and if the member requests delivery to the plaintiff, the settlement amount equivalent to the difference shall be deposited to the plaintiff by the 7th of the following month, and if the amount is less than the price of the plaintiff's order, the settlement amount shall be made monthly by the method that the plaintiff pays the difference to the member by the 12th of the following month.

By October 31, 2010, the settlement of accounts for the instant contracts that the Defendant unpaid to the Plaintiff is KRW 10,286,558 in total (hereinafter “the settlement of accounts”) and its details are as shown in the attached Table.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 11 (including each branch number, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of obligations.

유사 판례

-서울고법 2019. 10. 2. 선고 2018누66557 판결

-서울고등법원 2008. 7. 11. 선고 2008노680 판결

-서울고등법원 2018. 5. 18. 선고 2017노3609 판결

-서울중앙지방법원 2007. 2. 5. 선고 2006고합474,2006고합609(병합) 판결