Because the chicken sauce was not applied with a brush, the head office of Hosik Edumari Chicken, which canceled the franchise contract, asked the franchisees to pay 20 million won.

The Supreme Court's second part (Judge Ahn Chul-sang, Supreme Court Justice) said yesterday (3rd) that the franchisee A has confirmed the centrifugal ruling against the plaintiff in a lawsuit against the affiliated headquarters of the Hosik Idu Chicken Chicken.

Mr. A, who has been operating the Hosik Idumari Chicken Merchant in Daegu since September 2002, received corrections from the head office in March 2016 stating that he did not follow the franchise operation manual. The reason was that the sauce was sprinkled with a sprayer, not a cooking brush.

Mr. A asked to cancel the request for correction, saying, "I did it to make it taste better," and "There was no phrase in the manual that says'You shouldn't use spray'."

Then, after conducting a blind test with'brushing' and'sprinkling' at the place where the employees and others gathered, the company announced that it had the result that "the chicken that was applied with a brush produces the unique taste of Hosiki Chicken". As a result, Mr. A received a second request for correction, but repeatedly refused it. In the same year, in April of the same year, the head office notified the termination of the affiliate contract.


Subsequently, Mr. A filed a claim against the head office for damages of 30 million won, saying, "We refused to renew the contract due to a recipe not specified in the cooking manual." 

The first trial heard that the recipe in question was not specified in the manual, and judged that "notifying the rejection of the affiliate contract was an unfair transaction". He also ruled that the company refused to renew the franchise because it did not follow the corrective order and abused its superior business position to impose disadvantages on the franchisees. The 2nd trial and the 1st trial were accepted, and both appeals were dismissed.

The Supreme Court also raised Mr. A's hand. "Mr. A, who has been operating in the same region for more than 12 years, suffered substantial property damages due to the company's refusal to renew the contract, but he said the appeal was dismissed."

This is'News Pick'.

(Photo = Hosik Idu Chicken Chicken website, Yonhap News)