logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.04.20 2014가단5326965
가맹비반환 청구의 소
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) filed against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) KRW 29,241,667 and its related amount from October 1, 2014 to April 20, 2016.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts (i) The Plaintiff is a legal entity that mainly engages in consulting and arranging large real estate newly established on February 17, 201, and the Defendant is a domestic legal entity that started franchise business in Korea from February 2014 to a U.S. real estate franchise company.

on May 8, 2014, the Defendant entered into the franchise agreement (hereinafter “instant franchise agreement”) and on May 13, 2014, the Plaintiff agreed to pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 31,90,000,000 for educational expenses of KRW 10,000,000 for KRW 10,900 for educational expenses of KRW 100,000 for KRW 10,900 for KRW 100,000 for KRW 5 years for each business, and to pay only KRW 1,00,000 for each business employee, KRW 10,000 for each business employee, KRW 50,00 for each person per monthly membership fee, KRW 50,00 for each management employee, and KRW 100 for each monthly sales of KRW 10,00 for each business employee (where 100,000 for KRW 100 for each business employee, KRW 300 for each business employee).

Article 27(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act provides that the Plaintiff shall join the Plaintiff on September 30, 2014, and the Plaintiff sent e-mail that the monthly membership fee of the business employee is KRW 100,000 per capita and that it is difficult for them to join all as a result of the meeting (hereinafter “instant termination notification”). On October 1, 2014, the Defendant sent e-mail that all of the Defendant-related data will be deleted on the website.

x) On October 6, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the instant franchise agreement could be terminated because the Plaintiff violated Article 8(2) of the instant franchise agreement and Article 16 (exclusive relation and competition prohibition agreement). On November 20, 2014, according to the instant franchise agreement, all business employees belonging to the Plaintiff’s office join the Defendant, but rather, the Plaintiff did not pay attention to the Plaintiff.

arrow