beta
(영문) 수원지방법원여주지원 2015.12.08 2015가단21617

기타(금전)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion

A. On October 21, 2005, the chairperson of the plaintiff clan 3 and the chairperson of the D clan that was set up from the plaintiff clan (hereinafter the "D clan") shall be moved to the forest owned by the plaintiff clan, and the two members of D clans shall be moved to the forest owned by the plaintiff clans, and in return, D clans shall contribute to the payment of the sale price for the land (2,403 square meters in Incheon, which is registered in its name) located in the name, to the plaintiff clans, and the plaintiff clans agreed to every year for the two members of D clans that were set up for the management of the trial and resolution every year.

(hereinafter “Agreement on Claim of the Plaintiff”). (b)

D A clan G sold 113,946,839 won, which remains after deducting the funeral expenses, capital gains tax, etc., for the funeral of D clans from 180,000,000 according to the agreement of the plaintiff's assertion, and paid to the defendant who is the four presidents of the plaintiff clans on May 2, 2008, and around 2009, the plaintiff clan moved two clans of D clans to the plaintiff clans forest.

C. On May 18, 2010, the defendant embezzled the amount of KRW 113,946,839 for the donation of D clans to the chairperson of D clans E in violation of the purport of the agreement entered in paragraph (1). The defendant is obligated to pay the above embezzlement and its delay damages to the plaintiff.

2. around October 21, 2005, as to whether there was an agreement between the plaintiff's three members of the three members of the clan and the plaintiff's three members of the D clan to make a contribution to the plaintiff's clan as alleged by the plaintiff, it is difficult to view that there was a valid agreement on the disposal money so long as it is not possible for the plaintiff to represent the D clan around October 21, 2005, even according to witness G's testimony, as well as ① is not in a position to represent the D clan at the time of the plaintiff's argument, ② is the substance of D clan at the time of the plaintiff's argument, whose representative is unclear, and it is difficult to conclude that there was a valid agreement on the disposal money. ③ It is also submitted by the defendant.