logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.03.28 2018가합519910
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant amounting to KRW 70 million to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from March 24, 2017 to March 28, 2019.

Reasons

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the following facts: Gap's evidence 1 to 4, Gap's evidence 9 to 11, Gap's evidence 12-1, Gap's evidence 12-1 to 4, Eul's evidence 13-1 to 4, Eul's internal director C, and defendant's representative director D's overall purport of arguments.

The Defendant developed “F” mobile game and served from August 20, 2013 to February 24, 2015. (2) On February 4, 2016, the Plaintiff, who developed and sells a mobile program, entered into a contract with the Defendant to jointly develop “E” mobile games (hereinafter “E joint development agreement”).

The main contents of the above contract are as follows:

Article 1 (Purpose) of the E-Co-operation Contract is to stipulate the division of work, profit sharing, and all the provisions of E-Co-operation between the plaintiff and the defendant in good faith.

Article 2 (1) (Details of Provision of Information) (1) The defendant shall develop E mobile games in collaboration with the plaintiff.

(2) The Plaintiff shall provide planning coordination, design, and BM of the ES mobile game.

(3) The marketing costs shall be determined by mutual agreement of both parties.

(4) Business proceeds means open market proceeds, such as Google flass and app sets, advertising proceeds in the game, contractual proceeds on the resale of the game, and all other related profits.

Article 3 (Scope and Period of Business) (1) The defendant commences development simultaneously with the contract and commences development within three months on the basis of mutual consultation and agreed planning.

(4) The Plaintiff and the Defendant shall make every effort to present games within April 2016.

Provided, That the schedule may be adjusted at the time of withdrawal through consultation.

(5) The Plaintiff’s delivery, operation, etc. of the E mobile game.

arrow