(영문) 대구지방법원 2017. 7. 13. 선고 2016가합2523 제12민사부 판결

1. The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 241,885,660 as well as the amount calculated by applying the rate of 15% per annum from May 10, 2016 to the Defendant Regional Housing Association, and from October 9, 2016 to the date of full payment to the Plaintiff.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

3. Paragraph 1 above may be provisionally executed.

Purport of claim

The same shall apply to the order.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a company that conducts advertisement agency and production, etc., and the defendant A District Housing Association (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant Association") is a regional housing association established to promote a housing construction project by using Ulsan-gu Northern-gu A as a business site, and the defendant B (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant B") is a business unit of the defendant Association.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant Union prepared a certificate of broadcast advertising agency contract (hereinafter referred to as the “certificate of advertising agency contract of this case”) with the following contents for broadcast advertising business of Ulsan apartment (hereinafter referred to as “the apartment of this case”) that the Defendant Union newly constructed in the above business site, and submitted it to the Korea Broadcasting Promotion Corporation and the Korea Broadcasting Corporation, which vicariously executes the broadcast advertising business of KS and MFC, and the Korea Broadcasting Corporation, which vicariously executes the broadcast advertising business of SSBS, respectively.

On November 15, 2012 to November 14, 2013, the Product Korea Broadcasting Promotion Corporation prior to the date of signing a contract as an agent contract, and the product (main) media media media e.g. from July 13, 2013 to December 31, 2015, respectively.

C. After that, from November 2012, the Plaintiff performed the agency business of selling the apartment buildings, such as advertising for sale through broadcasting and printing media, advertising suspension, and sales promotional products production, etc., conducted by the Defendant Cooperative, and the advertising costs of KRW 401,885,660 were generated at the advertising costs.

D. The Plaintiff received only 160,000,000 won out of 401,885,660,000 as advertising expenses arising from the advertising agency business performed by the Defendant Union via Defendant B, and did not receive the remainder of 241,885,660 won (=401,885,660 won - 160,000 won).

E. On November 18, 2013, Defendant B’s advertising cost of KRW 241,885,660 is the Plaintiff’s unpaid advertising cost of KRW 241,85,660.

In January 31, 2014, I prepared a letter of payment assurance (hereinafter referred to as the "certificate of payment assurance") with which the obligation to pay by January 31, 2014.

F. After that, all new construction and sale of the instant apartment was completed.

【Reasons for Recognition】

O. Between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Cooperative: The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's entry in Gap (each broadcast advertising agency contract certificate, the defendant Cooperative's assertion to the effect that this document was forged by the network D, there is no evidence to acknowledge it as followed), 2 and 4 certificates (including serial numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

O between the plaintiff and the defendant B: Confession (Article 150 (3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. The parties' assertion

1) The plaintiff asserts that the defendant union is a party to the advertising agency contract of this case or is obligated to pay the plaintiff unpaid advertising expenses in accordance with Article 126 of the Civil Act as a party to the advertising agency contract of this case, and the defendant B acquired the defendant union's obligation to pay advertising expenses to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant B is jointly obligated to pay the plaintiff unpaid advertising

2) The Defendant Union asserts that the written confirmation of the instant advertising agency contract was forged by networkD without the authority to represent the Defendant Union, and that the Defendant Union is not a party to the instant advertising agency contract, and that the Defendant Union does not have the obligation to pay advertising expenses to the Plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. Determination as to the claim against the defendant union

1) Establishment of the obligation to pay advertising expenses

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant union written confirmation of this case's advertising agency contract to the plaintiff.

The plaintiff entered into an advertising agency contract with the plaintiff. Since the plaintiff performed the advertising agency business for the apartment project implemented by the defendant union, the defendant union is obligated to pay the plaintiff the unpaid advertising cost of 241,885,660 won and delay damages, barring special circumstances.

2) Whether the network D’s certificate of the instant advertising agency contract is forged or not

In this regard, the defendant union asserts to the effect that it is not a party to the advertising agency contract of this case since the certificate of the advertising agency contract of this case was forged by network D without the right to represent the defendant union.

However, there is no dispute between the parties that affixed the official seal of the defendant association with the seal affixed to the advertiser's column of the certificate of advertising agency contract of this case, but in full view of the above evidence, evidence Nos. 3-3, 5-2, 6-2, 1 and 4, and the overall purport of the statements and arguments Nos. 1 and 4 of A. 3-3, 5 (including the paper number), 6-2, 1, 2, 3, and 4, 2, 2, 2, 3, 2, 2, 2, 3, 2, 2, 2, 3, 2, 2, 3, 2, 3, 2, 4, 2, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 2, 2, 3, 2, 2, 2, 3, 2, 2, 3, 2, 2, 3, 2, 2, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1. of the advertising advertising.

In order to pay the Plaintiff the advertising expenses to Asian Trust Co., Ltd. which manages the company’s funds, and ④ Defendant B also paid the Plaintiff part of the advertising expenses of this case to Defendant Association. According to this, it is reasonable to deem that the network D formed an advertising agency contract with the authority to conclude the advertising agency contract of this case delegated by the Defendant Association for the purpose of selling apartment units, and prepared the confirmation document to the Plaintiff. The above confirmation document cannot be deemed to have been forged by the network D, and therefore, the above assertion by the Defendant Association is without merit.

3) Formation of liability for expressive representation under Article 126 of the Civil Act

Even if the network D did not have the authority to conclude the advertising agency contract of this case on behalf of the defendant association, in light of the fact that the network D had the basic authority to act for the defendant association, in light of the fact that it had been using the personal seal impression of the director and the president of the association with the defendant association in custody, and dealt with the overall affairs including the execution of the fund, it is reasonable to deem that the network D had the authority to act for the defendant association. In addition to the above facts, the above evidence and the whole purport of arguments can be comprehensively taken into account: (i) the plaintiff entered into the advertising agency contract of this case with the defendant association through the network D upon request of the director of the defendant association who was entrusted with the advertising agency business of the defendant association; (ii) the certificate of the advertising agency contract of this case appears to have been delivered the plaintiff with the seal seal seal of the defendant association while both the president and the employees of the defendant association were present, it is reasonable to believe that the plaintiff had the authority to conclude the advertising agency contract of this case on behalf of the defendant association.

B. Determination as to the claim against Defendant B

With respect to the part on which the plaintiff sought advertising expenses against the defendant B as an assignee for the overlapping obligation based on the instant payment undertaking, the above defendant shall be deemed to have led to confession pursuant to Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, the above defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay the advertising expenses and damages for delay which are not paid and paid to the plaintiff.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated from May 10, 2016, which is the day following the delivery date of the original copy of the instant payment order, and the Defendant B is liable to pay as damages for delay the amount calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from October 9, 2016 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the service date of the original copy of the instant payment order, to the day of the original copy of the instant payment order.

4.In conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted for all reasons, and it is so decided as per Disposition.