logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2019.11.07 2018가단213301
손해배상(기)
Text

1. All claims filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the counterclaim claims filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.

2...

Reasons

Facts of recognition

The Plaintiffs, from January 2018 to “F,” concluded a management contract with Defendant D, which is engaged in artificial fishery in the name of “G” at least 24 hours with the trade name of “F.”

The main content is that, upon introducing Defendant D to Defendant D a franchise business operator of “F”, Defendant D concludes a franchise business operator agreement with a franchise business operator, thereby allowing the Plaintiff to perform interior works in the form of the device designed by the Plaintiffs, and in return, pay the Plaintiffs money in the name of the management fee.

However, after the interior work for the second franchise business operator, there was a dispute over the payment of management fees between the plaintiffs and defendant D (the defendant's notification to the franchise business operator that "the plaintiff left a franchising in the name of the fee" seems to have been made) and the above management contract was de facto terminated by agreement on March 2018.

However, Defendant D carries out design and interior works for the unmanned posters franchise stores, which are operated with the trade name of “H”, and Defendant E is assisting the head of the management office of “G”.

The Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit by asserting that the interior of the “H” franchise store, the Defendants, filed the instant lawsuit by asserting that the idea was a pipe of his/her own franchise store.

[Ground] Facts without dispute: Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 8, and the purport of the entire pleadings as to the plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are asserted by the defendants. The defendants' assertion that they used the design of the interior of the "H" franchise store under their management without permission, and the interior of the "F" franchise store under their own management. This constitutes unfair competition or tort under Article 2 subparagraph 1 (b) and (k) of the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (hereinafter "Unfair Competition Prevention Act").

arrow