(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2020.01.31 2018나41508

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2020.01.31 2018나41508

투자금반환등

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the subsequent order of payment shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant: (a) invested KRW 10,00,000; (b) invested KRW 16,000,000 to acquire a restaurant operated by G in KRW 26,00,000; and (c) entered into a partnership agreement with the Plaintiff to distribute operating profits to KRW 50:50.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant trade agreement”). (b)

On November 3, 2017, the Plaintiff invested KRW 10,000,000, and the Defendant invested KRW 16,000,000 in accordance with the instant trade agreement (the Defendant paid KRW 7,500,000 in the store repair cost). On November 3, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant began to operate the restaurant in the name of “D”.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant restaurant”). C.

If the Plaintiff pays KRW 23,500,000 to the Defendant by January 16, 2018, the Plaintiff and the Defendant: (a) the Defendant renounced the instant restaurant; and (b) if the Plaintiff fails to pay the said money, the Defendant returned KRW 10,00,000 to the Plaintiff; and (c) the Plaintiff decided to waive the instant restaurant.

(hereinafter “instant agreement”). However, the Plaintiff failed to pay KRW 23,500,000 to the Defendant by January 16, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the primary cause of claim

A. Although Plaintiff 1’s assertion of the parties offered KRW 23,500,000 to the Defendant in accordance with the instant agreement, the Defendant unilaterally demanded that the Plaintiff pay KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff, and unilaterally closed the instant restaurant and committed a tort to reverse the instant agreement, and thereby, the Plaintiff could not obtain profit from the operation of the instant restaurant.

Therefore, the Defendant’s total sum of KRW 32,00,000, KRW 1,500,000, and KRW 18,000,00, and KRW 2,000,00, and KRW 32,00,00,00, which were the business profit that the Plaintiff had been able to obtain during the next one year, that was earned by the Plaintiff during the period of January 201, and the Plaintiff.

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2020.01.31 2018나41508

-대전지방법원 2017.04.11 2017가단1933

-부산지방법원 2017.09.13 2016가단64523

-울산지방법원 2018.09.20 2017가단69931

-창원지방법원 통영지원 2018.06.21 2018가단328