logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2015.05.15 2014가합102879
위약금 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From 2009 to 2009, the Plaintiff is a legal entity that engages in the franchise business, etc. of Shsawbabae restaurant in the Nam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul, by using the trade name “D”.

B. On May 8, 2013, the Defendant concluded a franchise agreement with the Plaintiff and Asan City E 203 to operate the said franchise store for two (2) years.

C. The contents of Article 39 of the instant contract are as follows.

Article 39 (Duty of Confidentiality or Competitive Practices of Franchisees) (1) A franchisee shall not divulge trade secrets, such as the cooking of a franchiser that he/she becomes aware of in the course of contract and the operation of a franchise store, to a third party even after the termination of the contract.

(2) No franchisee shall print or duplicate the details of the documents containing trade secrets of the franchiser in connection with education, seminars, data, and the operation of the franchise store without permission of the franchiser.

(3) No franchisee shall engage in the same type of business as the business of a franchiser under his/her or a third party's name without permission while a contract remains in existence.

(4) Where paragraph (1), (2) or (3) is violated, penalty for breach of such paragraph (3) shall be paid to the franchiser (200,000,000).

As the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to terminate the instant contract on August 2014, the instant contract was terminated on or around August 17, 2014.

On the other hand, from May 2014, F runs the restaurant business in the name of “H” on the second floor of the Guri-si Gagdong Building from May 2014, the Republic of Korea Scarbsawbab. From August 2014, F operates the “H Asan Embaba” in the first 203 Sinsan City from August 2014, and J is in charge of the practice of “H Ambababa”.

E. K, L, and F are simplified, and the defendant, J, and M are their husbands, and they are their husbands.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), witness N's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff.

arrow