logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.10 2017가단85185
광고대금 청구의 소
Text

1. The defendant shall pay 125,730,000 won to the plaintiff and 15% per annum from October 17, 2017 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company mainly engaged in advertising business, advertising agency business, etc.

B. On March 7, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into an advertising agency contract with the Defendant for a period of one year from April 1, 2017, with the term of the contract, to which the Defendant delegated the Plaintiff with the selection of media and the execution of advertising, and to the Plaintiff’s activities, such as planning and purchase of media, follow-up analysis and results in the execution of media, and the execution and management of the media budget. In principle, the Defendant, upon the end of the month following the month when the execution of the advertising is completed, entered into an advertising agency contract with the Plaintiff to pay the amount claimed to the Plaintiff in cash or in bills by the end of the

C. In accordance with the above advertising agency contract, the Plaintiff, from April 2017 to June 2017, performed duties such as the production of Nurber advertising and the execution of media for the Defendant.

The Plaintiff issued to the Defendant a tax invoice of KRW 125,730,000 in total as advertising price that was continued by the end of June, 2017. On August 30, 2017, the Plaintiff sent a content-certified mail demanding the payment of the advertising price, and the content-certified mail reached the Defendant on August 31, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1-4, Gap evidence 3-1-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the advertising price of KRW 125,730,000, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from October 17, 2017 to the day of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks, according to the above advertising agency contract, to the day following the day when the duplicate of the complaint reaches the Defendant.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow