영업권양도대금반환청구의 소
All appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On May 4, 2009, Defendant C entered into a contract with the Plaintiff (former husband of the Plaintiff: G) and the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant contract”) to transfer KRW 170 million of the instant private stay to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant contract”). On May 4, 2009, Defendant C, who was operating the Fambling in each of the Fambling located in Austrian Vienna E (hereinafter “1 private stay”), and L (hereinafter “2 private stay”), transferred KRW 50 million of the down payment on May 4, 2009, KRW 170 million of the instant contract to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant contract”). From the remainder of June 17, 2009, Defendant C transferred the amount of KRW 170 million of the instant contract to the Defendant’s account designated at the time of the instant contract (hereinafter “Defendant C”).
B. Around June 2009, Defendant C handed over the instant private gambling’s goodwill and key, etc., and around June 19, 2009, Plaintiff A entered into a lease agreement with Austria’s lessor with respect to the instant private gambling building and commenced the private gambling operation.
C. On November 2, 2010, Plaintiff A and H filed a criminal complaint with the Defendants and H on November 2, 2010 with the content that: (a) the Defendants and H did not have any intent or ability to change the purpose of their use to a youth hostel; (b) deceiving Plaintiff A, thereby impairing the reputation by spreading false facts about Plaintiff A and I.
Accordingly, only Defendant C was indicted on the charge of fraud, and the first instance court rendered a guilty verdict of the charge on December 12, 2012 and sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor to Defendant C (Seoul Northern District Court 201Dadan2722), but the appellate court rendered a judgment of not guilty on April 18, 2013 on the grounds that it is insufficient to recognize that Defendant C deceptiond the Plaintiff on the content of the instant contract (Seoul Northern Northern District Court 2012No1646, Apr. 18, 2013), and the said judgment was dismissed and finalized on September 26, 2013 as the prosecutor’s appeal was dismissed.
(Supreme Court Decision 2013Do5398). E.
The Defendants, H, and J against the Plaintiffs and I on September 25, 2016 = The balance under the instant contract against the Plaintiffs and I = 17.0 million won.