Whether the instant service contract constitutes invalidation due to an unfair legal act

There is no evidence to prove that the service cost of the instant service contract was calculated in excess of the ordinary service contract concluded between the rearrangement project management association and the rearrangement project management company. The mere fact that the Defendant asserts that the agreed remuneration amount is unfairly excessive under the instant service contract, and it is difficult to view it as contrary to the principle of good faith and good faith or the principle of fairness, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

Contents are the same as attachment.

Article 43 of the National Tax Collection Act

Daegu District Court 2016Gahap2066

Korea

○○ Co., Ltd.

March 22, 2018

April 19, 2018

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 0,000,000,000 and interest thereon from May 26, 2016 to the day of complete payment.

15% of the total amount of money shall be paid.

2. The costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendant, including the cost of the supplementary participation.

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

A. The supplementary intervenor of the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as "the supplementary intervenor") is a professional management business, etc. for reconstruction improvement projects.

On April 28, 2009, between the defendant's association establishment promotion committee (hereinafter referred to as "the defendant promotion committee") and the Daegu Nam-gu 00-00 project zone (hereinafter referred to as "the project zone of this case").

(2) housing in a lush zone with the contents of removing old and inferior structures and constructing new structures;

In relation to redevelopment and improvement projects (hereinafter referred to as "development projects of this case"), for specialized management of maintenance projects;

The reverse contract(hereinafter referred to as the "first contract of this case") was entered into.

B. On November 20, 2009, the head of Daegu Metropolitan City south-gu Office publicly notified the instant project zone as a housing redevelopment improvement zone, and the Defendant Promotion Committee obtained authorization for establishment from the head of Daegu Metropolitan City Southern-gu, on September 10, 2010.

C. On March 16, 2011, a subsequent supplementary intervenor had the content of the instant first contract between the Defendant and the Defendant.

contract to be amended as described above (hereinafter referred to as "the contract of this case")

The contract for the change of specialized management services for the redevelopment and rearrangement of housing.

1. Omitted;

(a) Details of business;

▷사업명: 용두지구 주택재개발 정비사업

▷위 치: 대구광역시 남구 봉덕동 916-10번지 일원

(b) Terms and conditions of the contract: Services prescribed in the general conditions and the special agreement;

(c) Contract term: from the date of conclusion of the contract to the time of liquidation of partnership;

(d) Amount of a service contract: Total sales (total sales revenue in lots) ¡¿ 2.2% (applicable rate of service cost);

1) 용역계약 금액(추정): 일금 삼십일억삼천구백구십이만팔천원정( �3,139,928,000)

2) 용역계약 금액(확정): 원정( � )

▷ 최종 확정 용역계약 금액은 사업시행인가 후 조합에서 정한 분양가 결정에 따라 사

When the total sales of the business are confirmed, the contract shall be concluded at that time. In such cases, a separate contract shall not be prepared, and the contract shall be concluded by filling the amount of the service contract in the official column for the determination of the amount of the service contract: Provided, That until the total sales of the business are finalized, the service price shall be paid to the "subsidized Intervenor" on the basis of the estimated service contract amount under the AAAAA Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project (Plan).

▷ 부가가치세는 별도로 한다.

General conditions of the contract.

Article 2 (Scope of Service Performance)

The term "convenor" shall act on behalf of, or assist or advise on, the following affairs pursuant to each subparagraph of Article 69 (1) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents among the partnership affairs from the

(1) Business support for the designation of rearrangement zones.

(2) Vicarious execution concerning the consents to partnership establishment and to rearrangement projects;

(3) Vicarious execution of affairs concerning applications for authorization to establish cooperatives.

(4) Review on feasibility and preparation of implementation plans for rearrangement projects;

(2) The main contents of the plan are as follows:

Amount of payment due to the classification;

100 billion won Additional Tax Table when the first payment contract is made

2. Schedule 200,000,000

When approving the establishment of the 3rd payment, the 00 billion Won Additional Tax Table

4. Additional tax on detention when applying for authorization to implement the 4th payment

The 5th payment of the 5th payment of the 5th payment of the additional tax

6 The first, second, 2 of the total service contract amount finalized pursuant to subparagraph 1(d) of the 6th transfer of payments

The amount remaining after deducting the amount of the rent, the third, the fourth, and the fifth payment shall be appropriately divided and determined with the amount of the sixth, the seventh, the eighth, and the nine payments.

7 The removal of the 7th payment

8. Commencement of the 8th payment

9 Payment of the 9th liquidation

(5) Support for the business of selecting a designer and a contractor.

(6) Vicarious works concerning applications for authorization for project implementation.

(7) Vicarious execution concerning the formulation of management and disposal plans.

(8) Review of design documents and review of details of changes in construction cost.

Article 3 (Supervision over Authorization and Permission Affairs)

In principle, all authorization and permission affairs related to housing redevelopment improvement projects shall be supervised by "the defendant", and "the supplementary participant" shall provide documents and administrative support necessary therefor: Provided, That it shall be supervised in the name of "the defendant", but the matters of authorization and permission may be performed by "the supplementary participant".

Article 8 (Payment Method and Time for Completion Payment of Service Costs)

(1) The term "defendant" shall pay the intervenor the progress payment for the service cost as follows:

(2) The term "defendant" shall, in case where the "convenor" claims progress payment for the service cost pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) of this Article, immediately pay it.

Article 14 (Bearing of Project Costs)

(1) An intervenor shall prepare design drawings and specifications for designation of an improvement zone in which it is impracticable for him/her to directly perform, conduct appraisal, measurement and traffic impact assessment, geological surveys, environmental impact assessment, noise impact assessment, expenses incurred in discovering

In principle, various kinds of expenses for projects shall be borne by the defendant.

Article 17 (Effectuation and Succession of Amendment Contracts)

(1) The validity of this contract shall enter into force simultaneously with the signatures and seals of both the defendant and the supplementary participant, and after authorization was granted to establish a rearrangement project management contractor and contracts performed by the promotion committee.

shall succeed automatically to the effect of this contract, and even if the chairperson, the president, and the president have changed, the effect of this contract shall not

shall not be deemed to have been automatically succeeded to this contract by the amended president and the president of the partnership.

D. On December 22, 2014, the Defendant: (a) shall submit an application for authorization to implement the project to the head of Daegu Metropolitan City, Daegu;

On October 2, 2015, the project implementation authorization was obtained from the head of the Daegu Metropolitan City Southern District Office.

E. The Defendant holds a meeting of representatives on May 14, 2015, and an extraordinary general meeting of members on October 21, 2015, respectively.

On December 30, 2015, when designating BB as a specialized management entity for a rearrangement project, the company entered into a contract for specialized management of the rearrangement project, setting the service cost as the balance after the settlement with the supplementary intervenor was completed, among the service cost under the instant contract, with the employees under the contract for specialized management of the rearrangement project.

F. The supplementary intervenor did not pay the value-added tax from around 2007, and the plaintiff did not do so.

On March 28, 2016, in order to collect the amount of KRW 0,000,000,000 from the Intervenor’s delinquent taxes until October 31, 2015, the Defendant notified the Defendant of the attachment of the claim that “the amount of the delinquent amount (including the increased additional dues added thereto) among the claims (including the claims to be incurred later) owed by the Intervenor against the Defendant was the subject of the attachment claim, and that the amount of the delinquent amount (including the increased additional dues added thereto) would be paid to the Plaintiff by March 31, 2016. The attachment notification reached the Defendant on March 31, 2016.

G. On March 28, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a written request for collection seeking payment of KRW 0,000,000,000 to the Intervenor’s delinquent amount by April 8, 2016 based on the seizure of the claim as of March 28, 2016. The Plaintiff sent the written request for collection to the Defendant on March 31, 2016, but the Defendant did not comply therewith.

(h) Value-added tax, corporate tax, etc. imposed on the supplementary intervenor on January 29, 2018 may be increased as of January 29, 2018

A total of KRW 0,000,000,00, including B.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's entries in Gap's 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 13, 19, 22, 23, 24, Eul's 3 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to Articles 41(2) and 3(1)2 of the National Tax Collection Act, the Plaintiff’s delinquent amount of national taxes

If a claim is seized to collect, it shall include national taxes in arrears, additional charges, and expenses for disposition on default.

Since a creditor who is a delinquent taxpayer is subrogated to the extent of the delinquent amount, it shall be within the scope of the delinquent amount.

The right to collect seized claims may be exercised.

B. The supplementary intervenor for the collection of the delinquent amount of national taxes against the supplementary intervenor by the plaintiff

Of the claims against the Defendant, an amount up to the amount in arrears was seized, and the Intervenor January 29, 2018

1,504,933,870 of the total amount of national taxes in arrears, and the Defendant’s service under the instant service contract

The time for payment is divided into nine stages, and the supplementary intervenor shall be given order in sequence according to the progress of each item of the project.

The payment shall be made at the time of contract, designation of improvement zone, authorization for establishment, and authorization for project implementation;

The agreement to pay 500,000,000 won in a fixed amount is made on the instant business area.

On November 20, 2009, there was a public notice of the designation of an improvement zone of the head of the Nam-gu Metropolitan City, Daegu Metropolitan City, and Defendant promoters.

On September 10, 2010, the Association has obtained authorization for establishment from the head of the Daegu-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Head of the Gu, and the defendant

On December 22, 2014, the fact that the application for authorization to implement the project was filed with the head of Daegu Metropolitan City Southern District Office was earlier.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor’s payment for the service under the instant service agreement from the Defendant.

165,00,000 won was paid.

C. Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant’s objection against the Defendant by the Intervenor

Until the fourth due date has become due under the service contract;

Of the claims of KRW 2,035,000 (=50,000 when a contract is concluded + KRW 500,000,000 at the time of designating a rearrangement zone + KRW 500,000,000 at the time of approving the establishment of an association + KRW 500,000 at the time of applying for authorization for the establishment of an association + value-added tax of KRW 200,00,000 at the time of applying for authorization for the implementation of an association + KRW 165,000 at the time of filing an application for authorization for the implementation of an association, the amount of KRW 165,00,00 for the obligor’s payment of the amount equivalent to the amount of national taxes in arrears of the Intervenor, and damages for delay thereof.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

(a) Nullity due to an unfair juristic act;

1) The defendant's assertion

The Defendant, at the time of entering into the instant service contract, did not have a common sense on the instant maintenance and improvement project. Accordingly, when entering into the instant service contract with the Intervenor, calculated the service price in excess of the ordinary service contract concluded between the other maintenance and improvement project partnership and the management and improvement project partnership. Moreover, even if the content of the instant service contract is in light of the content of the instant service contract, the Defendant’s duty performed by the Intervenor is merely the degree of performing its duty in writing.

On the other hand, the service cost was calculated excessively. Accordingly, the service contract of this case was calculated with the defendant's non-experience

As it constitutes a juristic act in which fairness is considerably lost, it is null and void;

Even if it does not constitute an unfair juristic act, the principle of trust and good faith and the principle of equity.

the amount of the service cost that the defendant shall pay must be limited.

2) Determination

A) On the other hand, an unfair legal act under Article 104 of the Civil Act is established when there exists a significant imbalance between payment and benefit in return. Such an unfair legal act is established when a transaction which has lost balance was conducted using gambling, rashness, or inexperience of the victimized Party. Even if the victimized Party was in an imminent state, if the victimized Party was aware of the circumstances on the part of the victimized Party, and if there was no intention to use it, i.e., bad faith, or there was no significant imbalance between payment and benefit, it cannot be deemed an unfair legal act under Article 104 of the Civil Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da216072, Jan. 15, 2015). There is no evidence to find that the Defendant had been in a state of gambling, rash or inexperience experience, or whether there was a bad faith to use it to the Intervenor knowing such circumstances by the Defendant.

B) In addition, the service price of the instant service contract is different from the maintenance and improvement project association and specialized management of the maintenance and improvement project.

Recognizing that the amount has been calculated in excess of the commercial services contract entered into between the enterprises;

The circumstances asserted by the defendant do not have any evidence, and the remuneration agreed upon under the service contract of this case

It is difficult to see that the amount unfairly excessive is contrary to the principle of good faith or the principle of fairness.

and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

C) Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

(b) Non-performance of the services by the assistant intervenor;

1) The defendant's assertion

The Intervenor did not perform the services related to the designation of the rearrangement zone, the authorization for establishment, and the authorization for project implementation under the instant service contract, and there was no particular task related to the above services. Therefore, the Defendant did not have a duty to pay the Plaintiff KRW 1,500,000 for the service cost related to the above services.

2) Determination

A) In light of the following circumstances, each of the statements in Gap 15, Gap 18, 20, 21, 23 through 57 (including a Serial number) and the overall purport of testimony and pleading in the witness stand-up testimony and the entire arguments, each of the statements in Eul 2, 5, 6, 7, 9, and 13 is alone, the supplementary intervenor did not perform services related to the designation of the rearrangement zone, the authorization for the establishment of the association, and the authorization for the implementation of the project in accordance with the instant service contract, or related to the rearrangement project in this case, the supplementary intervenor did not perform services related to the rearrangement project in question.

It is insufficient to recognize that a person has not performed his duties, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.

(1) After the conclusion of the instant initial contract, the Defendant, on October 21, 2015, performed an extraordinary general meeting of its members.

Until the project district decides on the agenda item to terminate the instant service contract by holding a meeting;

Designation of the rearrangement zone for the station, authorization for the establishment of the promotion committee for the defendant, and the rearrangement project in this case

The application for the authorization of project implementation and the authorization of project implementation have been made in succession, as above,

In the course of proceeding with the maintenance project, the defendant or the defendant's promotion committee's assistant participant

An objection to demand the performance of services under the dry Service Contract or on the grounds that the service is not performed, etc.

there was no failure to file an action.

(2) The Defendant Promotion Committee requested the supplementary intervenor to provide a resident presentation notice according to the public notice on the designation of the rearrangement zone before the public notice on the designation of the rearrangement zone was issued, and the supplementary intervenor submitted a written notice on November 19, 2009 to the Defendant Promotion Committee to arrange the resident presentation notice and the relevant statutes on restricted acts after the public notice on the designation of the rearrangement zone.

(3) As to the establishment authorization of the Defendant’s promotion committee, the supplementary intervenor

From August 2009 to December 2009, the conference submitted the association articles of association, the draft promotion committee's business regulations, the documents submitted to the accounting firm related to external accounting audit, and the written consent form of landowners' consent on the amount spent by the defendant promotion committee. On December 10, 2009, the plaintiff sent the documents of the title "to submit the inaugural general meeting data for the establishment of the association" and provided the data and information on the method of submitting consent form, attached documents, etc. of the association establishment. After that, the supplementary intervenor requested the defendant promotion committee to issue a certified copy of the whole landowners' written consent for the establishment of the association. The supplementary intervenor hired an employee from some landowners to perform the duty of collecting consent form, written resolution, written consent form, and written consent form, etc. from the association establishment from some landowners. On August 10, 2010, the defendant promotion committee requested the head of Daegu Metropolitan City to establish the association.

As above, the supplementary intervenor necessary to establish an association after the establishment of the first contract of this case.

An association establishment authorization and authority, such as preparing all documents and guiding the procedures related to the association establishment authorization;

The defendant's promotion committee actually obtained the approval of establishment from the head of Daegu Metropolitan City on September 10, 2010, and the approval of establishment also includes the supplementary intervenor as a rearrangement project management contractor.

(4) The assistant intervenor constantly set up a project implementation plan to the defendant since 2011

documents necessary for the selection of service companies and related service companies, the selection of construction works, and the application for project implementation authorization.

Along on December 22, 2014, the Defendant provided information on the authorization to implement the project, etc., and provided the information on the authorization to implement the project.

The Defendant’s provision of the project implementation plan and related documents for the purpose of the project implementation plan;

The defendant submitted an application for authorization to implement the project to the head of Daegu Metropolitan City on December 22, 2014, and the application for authorization to implement the project is described as the supplementary intervenor in the application for authorization to implement the project.

(5) The defendant asserts to the purport that the payment period of the fourth service price should be deemed to be the time when the project implementation authorization was granted, because the defendant's meaning to the defendant in relation to the instant rearrangement project is not the application for the project implementation authorization. However, as seen earlier, the service contract of this case clearly stated that the payment of the fourth service price is made at the time of the application for the authorization of the project implementation. ② On August 30, 2014, the defendant held a general meeting of union members and presented an agenda item to change the service price of this case to KRW 2,50,000,000. The period of payment of the fourth service price is stated as the time of the application for the approval of the project implementation. ③ The service contract of this case includes the time of payment of the service price as the time of designation of the rearrangement zone, when the authorization, permission, etc. related to the instant rearrangement project of this case is completed, as the time of the application for the authorization of the project implementation, and the term of payment is different from the term of the service contract of this case.

In light of the fact that it is difficult to find out the circumstances or reasons, the timing for payment of the fourth service price.

As alleged by the defendant, it cannot be seen that the authorization for project implementation has been completed. In addition, even if the authorization for project implementation has been completed as alleged by the defendant, the due date for the fourth service payment shall arrive at

However, as seen earlier, as long as the Defendant had already obtained authorization for the implementation of the project on October 2, 2015 from the head of the Daegu Metropolitan City, the time for payment of the fourth service cost has arrived at the same time.

(6) In relation to the progress of the instant rearrangement project, the Intervenor performed various services under the instant service contract and claimed the Defendant for the payment of the service cost several times. However, the Defendant did not raise any objection as to whether or not the Intervenor’s service performance was performed or the degree thereof.

(7) As alleged by the Defendant, if there was no task performed by an intervenor in relation to the designation of a rearrangement zone or the establishment of an association, the designation of an improvement zone and the establishment of an association have already been completed at the time of the conclusion of the instant service contract. Therefore, the content of the contract can be revised by failing to state the payment of the service cost of KRW 500,000,000 each at the time of designation of an improvement zone or the establishment of an association, or by paying the service cost in relation to other services, but the contract of this case was written as payment of the service cost of KRW 500,000 each at the time of designation of an improvement zone and the establishment of an association. In addition, the Defendant’s account statement prepared by the former president CCC while transferring the partnership’s business to DD around March 28, 2013 is written as the Defendant’s payment of the service cost of KRW 1,2,300,000 as the aggregate of the service cost under the instant service contract, and the Defendant’s payment of KRW 10,5000.

B) Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

(c) Mutual aid or reduction;

1) The defendant's assertion

FF, the representative of the Intervenor, committed a tort by inciting the Defendant’s members to dismiss the president of the association, or by requiring the president of the association to file a complaint. Accordingly, the Defendant respondeded to various lawsuits or suffered losses due to the delay in the instant maintenance and improvement project. Therefore, even if the Defendant’s service payment to the Intervenor under the instant service contract exists, the amount of damages suffered by the Defendant due to the said Intervenor’s tort should be deducted or reduced from the service payment.

2) Determination

In light of the records of evidence No. 8, evidence No. 8, and testimony by the witness establisher alone, it is not sufficient to recognize that the FFF, the representative of the assisting intervenor, intended to instigates the defendant's association members to dismiss the head of the association or to have the head of the association file a complaint against the head of the association, or that the damage was incurred to the defendant. Since there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the damage was caused to the defendant, the above argument by the defendant on the premise that the defendant has a damage claim against the assisting intervenor for the tort

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the Defendant’s collection amounting to KRW 1,504,933,870 and a duplicate of the instant complaint against the Plaintiff.

Matters concerning the promotion, etc. of litigation from May 26, 2016 to the date of full payment, etc., which is obvious from May 26, 2016.

There is an obligation to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Special Act on Special Cases.

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

shall be ruled.