(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2015.04.09 2014가합1116

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) 수원지방법원안산지원 2015.04.09 2014가합1116

위약금 등

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Around December 2011, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff had entered into a franchise agreement (hereinafter “instant franchise agreement”) with the Plaintiff on “E”, a chain business entity related to chickens operated by the Plaintiff.

However, the defendant operated a chickens-related business in the name of "D," which is the same type of business in violation of the duty of prohibition of competition under Article 18 of the franchise agreement, and purchased goods from another company without being supplied by the plaintiff or the plaintiff's subcontractor at will without being supplied with goods by violating the duty of prohibition of self-purchase as stipulated in Article 23 of the franchise agreement, and did not pay royalties as stipulated in Article 15 of the franchise agreement (1%) to the plaintiff.

Therefore, the Defendant has a duty to discontinue the business of “D” and not to conduct the business of “E”, and the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the Plaintiff penalty of KRW 23,000,000 and penalty of KRW 26,000,000, which is part of the unpaid royalties, due to the violation of the obligation of prohibition of competition and prohibition of self-purchase.

2. According to the records of Gap evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the plaintiff entered into the instant franchise agreement with the defendant on May 22, 2012.

However, on March 16, 2015, the Plaintiff, while continuing the instant lawsuit, submitted a written withdrawal of the lawsuit, stating that “The chain business of “E” was transferred to Nonparty F on or around January 20, 2014, prior to the instant lawsuit, to the Plaintiff.”

(B) On March 20, 2015, the Defendant agreed to the withdrawal of the Plaintiff’s lawsuit. On the other hand, F submitted an application for intervention in succession to this court by asserting that the chain business of “E” was transferred from the Plaintiff on March 12, 2015 prior to the withdrawal of the Plaintiff’s lawsuit, but was dismissed on March 30, 2015. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s above assertion premised on the existence of rights and obligations under the instant franchise agreement is without merit without further review.

3. Conclusion.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2018.09.20 2018가단215977

-서울고등법원 2017.12.14 2016나2078081

-수원지방법원안산지원 2016.10.13 2015가합21070

-서울고등법원 2014.11.26 2013누32399

-광주지방법원 2020.12.24 2020가합52844