beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.07.19 2017나2018918

업무방해금지 청구의 소

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 2016, the Plaintiff Incorporated Foundation (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) entered into a business agreement with the Plaintiff Company that the Plaintiff Company is entrusted with the selection of the gas supplier (collective supplier) and the Si/Gun/Gu construction work for the village unit pipeline construction project implemented by Gyeonggi-do between Ansan and Ansan-si.

B. On July 25, 2016, Plaintiff non-K Energy Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff non-K Energy”) selected Plaintiff as the contractor. On July 25, 2016, Plaintiff non-K Energy entered into a construction contract for the construction work with the Plaintiff-K Energy Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff-K Energy”).

C. Plaintiff non-K Energy intended to carry out construction works to install a LPG small storage tank (hereinafter “instant construction works”) on the instant land, which is the land on October 21, 2016 and October 31, 2016 where 20 persons, including the Defendant, including the Defendant, own 1/20 equity shares, but failed to carry out construction works against the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements or images, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The act of establishing a LPG small storage tank on the ground of the plaintiffs' assertion is an act of managing jointly owned properties, and the plaintiffs conduct the construction of this case with the consent of 13/20 of the majority of the co-owners of the land of this case. Thus, the defendant who is a minority right holder shall not interfere with the construction of this case.

3. Determination

(a) The detailed method for co-owners to use and profit from the co-ownership shall be determined by a majority of co-owners' shares, as matters concerning the management of the co-ownership, and the co-owners who hold a majority of shares did not have consultation on the method of management of the co-ownership

The matters concerning the management of the article jointly owned may be decided independently.