beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment is modified as follows.
Of the instant lawsuits, May 4, 2018.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of this court’s judgment citing the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, as follows.
[Judgment of the court of first instance is just, and there is no error as alleged in the ground for appeal by the defendant, even if the evidence duly examined by the court of first instance is viewed as evidence Nos. 21 through 25 submitted by the defendant in this court (including the number of branch numbers)
A. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the two pages 15 to 20 are as follows.
On December 6, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a convenience store management service contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant from December 17, 2013 to December 16, 2016, for the convenience store of 19.2m2m2 in the (Ga) shop in the order of each point in the instant building and the (Ga) 19.2m2m2 in the (Ga) shop in the middle-gu (hereinafter “instant store”) among the above 188-ground buildings, for the convenience store of 18m26m2 in the non-dental-dong 3-dong 2, 25.5m2 of the monthly total sales (including value-added tax) as sales service fees, and the contract period for convenience store sales and management services (hereinafter “instant contract”).
B. The third to seven parallels in the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows.
D. The Defendant deposited 37,709,901 won (i.e., KRW 24,720,005, Mar. 4, 2017; KRW 52,175, and KRW 976, Jun. 26, 2017, KRW 897,06, KRW 297, KRW 319,368, KRW 208, Aug. 29, 2017, KRW 208, KRW 37,803, KRW 145, KRW 26,050, KRW 208, KRW 258, KRW 208, KRW 258, KRW 258, KRW 208, KRW 258, KRW 258, KRW 205, KRW 26,050, KRW 26,050, KRW 695, KRW 205, KRW 27,1967, Oct. 24, 20197
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 9, 10, Eul evidence Nos. 8, 17 through 20, 25 (including branch numbers), and arguments.