(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.01.12 2015나33449

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.01.12 2015나33449

지원금 등 반환 청구

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person operating the “C” that provides credit card approval services, and the Defendant is a person who operates the Smarket in the name of the “Emart” in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (D floor No. 1).

B. On December 9, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a franchise agreement with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant franchise agreement”).

Article 3 (Period of Contract) In principle, the Defendant agreed to use the card investigator supplied by the Plaintiff from December 9, 201 to December 8, 2014, and the suspension of use or the use or replacement of other companies (VN companies) shall not be permitted.

In addition, it discusses the termination or extension of the contract by giving prior notice one month prior to the expiration of the contract term.

Article 4 (Terms of Contracts) The plaintiff and the defendant shall observe and implement the following terms of contract after consultation:

Cash support of KRW 10,00,000, total of KRW 50 per case of the number of contracts shall be 200,000.

(b) At the time of request, support for the arrival of door-to-door distribution;

(c) In the event that the Defendant unilaterally destroys the contract during the contract period or suspends the use of the mobile device, 1, 3, 3, and 3, 7 (Indemnification), without prior consent, the Defendant compensates the Plaintiff twice the down payment (the total amount of the subsidy to be paid or to be paid within the contract period).

Article 8 The franchise store contract (A) is specified in Article 7, but it is deemed to be a clerical error in Article 8, so it is called Article 8.

(Effective) If the number of approvals during the contract period is more than two months but less than 90%, the Plaintiff may request the Defendant to modify the contract, and if there is no reasonable ground, the Defendant shall accept the change of the contract and return or refund the already supported amount, equipment, etc. in proportion to the change of the contract.

C. The Plaintiff provided the Defendant with a credit card inquiry machine, etc., and paid 10 million won of the advance payment on December 14, 201.

The defendant on December 9, 2014.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2017.01.11 2016나310266

-서울북부지방법원 2016.12.08 2015가단121574

-서울서부지방법원 2016.04.08 2015나35960

-서울서부지방법원 2016.04.08 2015나35823

-서울서부지방법원 2015.05.01 2014나3430