(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.10.25 2019나659

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) 서울남부지방법원 2019.10.25 2019나659

계약금반환

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person running “C” (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s business store”), and the Defendant is a company running an advertising media agency business.

B. On November 10, 2017, when the Plaintiff pays KRW 1,320,00 to the Defendant, the Plaintiff entered into an advertising contract on behalf of the Defendant for the method of transmitting the Plaintiff’s operating store advertisements through non-combined, searched, D, etc. (hereinafter “instant advertising contract”).

Among the customers using Busan subway stations, the advertisement was included in the way of transmitting the advertisement to the persons with app installed on the smartphone. However, at the time of the advertisement contract of this case, the defendant did not notify the plaintiff of the above method of transmitting the advertisement.

C. On January 18, 2018, the Plaintiff asked the Defendant that he did not receive the advertisement as his own cell phone from Hongcheon Station, and the Defendant had known the Plaintiff that the advertising advertisement under the instant advertising contract is limited to the mobile phone in which a specific program is installed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the advertising contract of this case was duly revoked by the Plaintiff’s declaration of revocation, since the Plaintiff entered into the advertising contract of this case in the state that the Plaintiff did not inform the Plaintiff of all the material part of the contract at the time the advertising contract of this case was entered into. As such, the advertising contract of this case may be revoked in accordance with the main sentence of Article 109(1) of the Civil Act. Since the fact that the Plaintiff’s written statement that the advertising contract of this case was revoked by mistake is apparent in the record that the Plaintiff was served on the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant is subject to the cancellation of the advertising contract of this case, unless there are special circumstances.

참조조문

-민법 제109조 제1항

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2018.01.11 2017가단235479

-서울남부지방법원 2016.02.24 2015가단11070

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.26 2015가합500915

-광주지방법원 2015.12.24 2015가합53546

-서울남부지방법원 2016.09.29 2016나1729