beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff added the judgment equivalent to that of paragraph (2) to the assertion that the appellate court rendered at the appellate court, and thus, it is acceptable to accept
The summary is that the defendants jointly bear the liability for damages under Articles 35(1) and 756 of the Civil Act against the plaintiff according to the tort such as G and N. The scope is limited to KRW 20,000 of the down payment paid by the plaintiff and KRW 3,720,000 of the goods supplied on credit.
2. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff's additional determination as to the plaintiff's assertion in the appellate court shall present the home shopping retail sales price of the product of this case, which was sold at KRW 598,00 in the original consumer price at KRW 190,00 in the course of deceiving the plaintiff, and advise him to suspend the intermediate sale of the product of this case, and that the plaintiff shall also include the reduced sales volume of KRW 185,202,859 in the scope of damages.
According to Gap evidence No. 12-1, G recommended that the price of the instant product should be adjusted to KRW 190,000 when G sells the instant product to the plaintiff through home shopping.
However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that G recommended the Plaintiff to suspend the intermediate sale of the product of this case.
Since the recommendation of G’s home shopping retail sales price itself is unreasonable and there is no evidence to deem it as a tort, it is difficult to view that there is a proximate causal relation between such recommendation and the damage claimed by the Plaintiff, such as sales reduction.
Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion cannot be accepted.
3. On the other hand, the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed in entirety.