beta
Text
1. The following shall be paid among the part concerning the claim for damages in the judgment of the court of first instance (Article 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance).
Reasons
1. Grounds for the court’s explanation concerning this case, which cited the judgment of the court of first instance, are grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance.
(c).
E. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where E.W. (No. 9 of the judgment of the court of first instance, No. 13 to No. 16, No. 20 of the 16 of the 19) is
- - The following:
C. According to the facts of recognition of the Defendants’ liability for damages, Defendant B, as a party to the instant sub-lease contract, did not notify the Plaintiff, who is a party to the instant sub-lease, of the fact of unauthorized extension of the store, which is an essential matter under the contract, and thereby caused damage to the Plaintiff by failing to notify the Plaintiff. Defendant C also knew of the fact that the Plaintiff intended to operate the restaurant in the instant shop, and without notifying the Plaintiff of the fact that the Plaintiff was trying to operate the restaurant, the Plaintiff agreed to the instant sub-lease contract under the premise that the Plaintiff did not have any impediment to using the store as restaurant and profit-making, thereby having committed the said illegal act jointly with or aiding and abetting Defendant B at least. Accordingly, the Defendants are jointly obligated to compensate for damages arising from the Plaintiff’s failure to use the store in accordance with the instant sub-lease contract under Article 760 of the Civil Act. The Defendants’ assertion as to the Defendants’ assertion that the Defendants concluded the instant sub-lease contract with the Plaintiff, without knowing the Plaintiff’s permission.
The plaintiff knew that the store of this case was extended without permission at the time of entering into the sub-lease contract of this case.
The re-lease contract of this case was concluded by allowing the state of unauthorized extension.