(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.04.05 2018나2041281

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) 서울고등법원 2019.04.05 2018나2041281

부당이득금

Text

1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff and Defendant B are dismissed.

2. Defendant B, which the Plaintiff added in this court as the conjunctive.

Reasons

1. Grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance for the entry of this case in this case;

(b) (1) subparagraph 5 (the last sentence of page 11) in paragraph (c) of this Article is applied to “Article 5” and Article 2 concerning Defendant B’s claim for offset;

(a) 2) (b) (in 10, 19 et al.) and 2-

B. Paragraph 3 (3) (No. 16 No. 20) (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Company”) is to be solidified as set forth in Paragraph 2(a) below, and the Plaintiff is to be the Defendant Company C (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Company”).

In addition to the examination of the claim for the return of unjust enrichment against Defendant B, which was added as the primary claim and added as the conjunctive claim, as set forth in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, the ground for the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the judgment.

2. Determination on replacement or addition

A. (1) As to the Defendant B’s assertion of set-off, at the time of the instant contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company agreed to invest in the share of 51:49, and to operate three hospitals including D points, G points, and F points to share the profits, as well as losses. The Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 483,039,950, which is equivalent to 49% of losses, due to the settlement of accounts following the rescission of the instant contract, as the Plaintiff’s claim for the settlement of accounts against the Plaintiff, is offset against the amount equal to the Plaintiff’s claims for restitution following the Plaintiff’s rescission of the instant contract.

(2) The allegation in this part of the judgment of Defendant B is premised on the agreement to share the loss in accordance with the ratio of shares against the Defendant Company in the event a loss occurs due to the establishment and operation of hospital after jointly making an investment with the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this.

In other words, the contract of this case (as the first instance court has properly stated).

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2018.09.07 2018나868

-서울고등법원 2015.07.03 2015나3978

-서울남부지방법원 2020.01.17 2018나63608

-인천지방법원 2020.02.04 2019나53290