[건물공유지분권이전등기][집7민,155]
The burden of proof of the person who asserts the withdrawal and the withdrawal of the partner.
A union is established by each party's investment in order to operate a joint business. It is not necessary to specify the duration of the contract or the distribution of profits and losses in the conclusion of the contract, and it must be resolved by applying the provisions of the Civil Act concerning the partnership unless otherwise agreed on the terms and conditions. Therefore, it cannot be said that the court failed to make an oral deliberation.
Article 678 of the Civil Act
Mashee
Maternity
Jeju District Court Decision 57No322 delivered on August 20, 1958, Jeju District Court Decision 57No322 delivered on August 20, 1958
In light of the reasoning of the original judgment and the record, the court below rejected the defense that the plaintiff, as a witness interest Kim Tae-ho, was absent from the partnership, on the ground that the plaintiff, in June 1955, did not give testimony to the witness interest Kim Tae-ho and did not have any other evidence to recognize the fact that the plaintiff, as a witness of the original judgment, went away from the partnership in the middle of June 1955. The purport of the plaintiff in the plaintiff's argument that he was forced to respond to military service in the middle of June 1955, and that the plaintiff in the plaintiff in the plaintiff's argument was forced to leave the partnership in the middle of the year of 1955, cannot be interpreted as a declaration of intention to withdraw from the other union. Thus, there is no error of law as against the reasoning of the original judgment, such as giving rise to the decision
Justices Kim Du-il (Presiding Justice)