beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Plaintiff regarding the amount of payment ordered below.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff operates construction machinery business under the trade name of “E”, and the Defendant operates construction machinery brokerage and rental business.
B. C served as an engineer of the Defendant from December 1, 2013 to July 15, 2014.
C. Upon C’s request, from January 8, 2014 to January 11, 2014, the Plaintiff leased 500 tons of caters from January 16, 2014, and 300 tons of caters from January 16, 2014 (a combined each of the above lending agreements; hereinafter “instant lease agreement”); the sum of the user fees was KRW 32 million (i.e., fee of KRW 500 tons of caters of KRW 27 million).
The Plaintiff was prepared and delivered a standard construction machinery lease contract with C, stating the details of the use, amount of use, etc., while allowing C to use the said server as above.
The “Lessee” of the above contract for each of the above Leaks is written by the Plaintiff. The “Lessee” column for the above 500 tons of the contract for the said 500 tons of the contract is written by the “F”, and the “Lessee” column for the above 300 tons of the contract for the said 300 tons of the contract is written by the “G”, and both the “Lessee” column for each of the above contracts are written by the “B Company C” along with the resident registration number
E. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff was already paid KRW 3 million from the Defendant’s royalty under the instant lease agreement.
[Judgment of the court below] Facts that there was no dispute over the ground for recognition, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 10, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion
A. At the time of entering into the instant lease agreement with the Plaintiff, C had the basic power of attorney to enter into the instant lease agreement with the Defendant, and even the instant lease agreement, C was believed to have the authority to enter into the instant lease agreement on behalf of the Defendant, such as indicating C himself/herself as the Defendant’s employee, and there exists any justifiable reason to believe such agreement. Therefore, it is in accordance with Article 126 of the Civil Act.