[운임][공1988.12.1.(837),1466]
In a case where Gap and Eul will operate the above factory in their name under the responsibility of Eul, the legal nature of the partnership and the application of Article 713 of the Civil Code is made.
In order for Gap and Eul to run a partnership with its factory, Eul shall pay the investment amount, and Eul shall be responsible for the security deposit and facilities, etc. of the factory, and the business shall operate the factory under the name of Eul, and the profits shall be reserved in the factory, and Eul shall have registered its business in its name and operate the factory under its own responsibility under its own responsibility upon entering into a partnership agreement with Eul to receive monthly benefits agreed upon with Gap, and if Eul operates the above factory under its own responsibility, it may be a kind of partnership under the Civil Act in the internal relationship. However, in the case of external juristic act with Eul, it shall be a kind of special partnership separate from the ordinary partnership under the Civil Act in the sense that it is not necessary for Gap to act as a partner, and the rights and duties for it are attributed to Eul, and there is no room for the application of Articles 711 through 713 of the Civil Act since Eul shall acquire only the right to operate the business and bear obligations.
Article 713 of the Civil Act
Supreme Court Decision 81Da650 delivered on May 10, 1983, Supreme Court Decision 83Meu1996 delivered on December 11, 1984
Attorney Lee Young-gu et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant
Defendant Park Jae-ho, Counsel for the defendant-appellant
Daegu High Court Decision 85Na818 delivered on December 6, 1985
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
The grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2 are also examined.
According to the facts established by the court below, the defendant and the non-party 1 (hereinafter referred to as the "non-party") agreed to operate a factory which produces Ansantech in their trade name, and invested 27,500,000 won in each share of 50 percent, but the defendant paid the non-party an investment to the non-party, and is responsible for the deposit money for the above factory, machinery, tools and facilities, the non-party is responsible for the non-party, and the non-party's business operates the factory under his own name and reserved the profit within the above factory, and the non-party entered into a partnership agreement with the non-party to receive monthly salary agreed with the defendant, and accordingly, the non-party registered its business in its name and operated the above three industry company under his own responsibility, and if so, it can be deemed as a kind of association under the Civil Act in its internal relationship, or the non-party's external legal act does not constitute a special violation of the non-party's 17th of the Civil Act, and there is no possibility for the non-party to apply it to the non-party's special rights and duties to the non-party.
As above, the court below recognized that the non-party was granted the authority to handle the external performance of his duties in his name under his own responsibility, and in such a case, the rights and duties arising from the act performed by the non-party belong to the non-party individual, and the issue of whether this belongs to the non-party and the defendant again shall be deemed to be an internal problem
Therefore, this paper is without merit.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Ansan-man (Presiding Justice)