logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.01.10 2015가합1572
영업권 등 존재확인의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

Reasons

On January 1, 2001, Defendant B, the Plaintiff’s assertion of the parties, made business registration with the name of “D”, and started service business with the Defendant C, who was the former husband, on the lease deposit amounting to KRW 10 million,00,000,000,000, and KRW 1.5 million,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

Since then, in 2002, G, the Plaintiff’s mother, acquired business rights including the right of lease of the above store, and Defendant B obtained the identification card and seal of Defendant B and used them for business purposes, such as renewal of the contract.

In this regard, Defendant B demanded that Defendant B move into a rental apartment at the end of 2012 and arranged his/her business registration, and the Plaintiff reported the closure of the “D” with the permission of Defendant B.

Since then, the Plaintiff registered the business with the trade name “H”, and continued the instant business by opening a new store on the fourth floor of the instant department store.

Nevertheless, from February 2014, the Defendants asserted the existence or absence of the business rights of the Plaintiff concerning the instant business by forging documents, citing the false fact that “the Plaintiff and G did not acquire the business rights from Defendant B, thereby making a report on the closure of the business of the instant case, and spreading the same.” As such, there is a benefit to seek confirmation against the Defendants that the status of the parties to the instant contract is the Plaintiff.

Defendant B’s assertion was not a transfer of business rights of the instant case to G around April 2002, but merely a sub-lease contract regarding the instant store.

Nevertheless, in around 2002, the Plaintiff and G changed the former lease agreement into a purchase transaction agreement without Defendant B’s permission and KRW 10 million as the lease deposit amount is KRW 2 million.

arrow