(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.10.17 2018나69363

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) 수원지방법원 2019.10.17 2018나69363

기타(금전)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is 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 grounds for the court’s explanation as to the facts of recognition, the parties’ assertion, and the defense of this part are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. The plaintiff asserts that he had sold the goods on consignment under the contract of this case and sought payment of the sales commission indicated in the "sales commission" column of the annexed settlement sheet and the total of 123,090,000 won (i.e., sales commission 117,190,000 won x 20,000 won x 295) and its delay damages.

In regard to this, the Defendant asserted that, in violation of the instant contract, the Plaintiff did not arbitrarily observe the sales commission set forth in the policy table presented by the Defendant and did not have the obligation to pay the sales commission for the sales commission to the subordinate stores.

B. Determination 1) Interpretation of an expression of intent of a relevant legal doctrine clearly establishes the objective meaning that a party gave to the act of expressing the intent. If a contractual content is written in writing as a disposal document between the parties, the objective meaning that the party gives to the act of expressing the intent shall be reasonably interpreted according to the contents written, regardless of the party’s internal intent, even though it is not bound by the written statement. In such a case, if the objective meaning of the text is clear, barring any special circumstance, the existence and content of the expression of intent ought to be recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da81957, Jan. 27, 201), barring any special circumstance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da81957, Jan. 27, 2011). If an express or implied agreement different from the content

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2018.09.12 2018나2011112

-춘천지방법원 2019.10.30 2019나50622

-대구지방법원상주지원 2014.05.14 2013가단1975

-서울서부지방법원 2015.10.22 2015가단1744

-서울서부지방법원 2015.12.03 2015가단24778