logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.09.13 2016가단5177
양수금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 23, 2011, the chairperson of the defendant clan C (the present chairperson and the name of the Dong members) made and delivered a payment note stating that "D agreed to pay KRW 200 million to D for three years in a lawsuit that found the 96 piece of property of the defendant clan, which was paid to D for expenses incurred in cooperation for three years, and for expenses incurred in collecting the 96 piece of property of the defendant clan, the chairperson deducted the amount of KRW 37 million from D and paid KRW 163 million to D, and the amount of KRW 163 million will be paid to D as soon as possible after the conclusion of the judgment (hereinafter "the payment note of this case")."

B. On February 4, 2016, D transferred to the Plaintiff a claim of KRW 163 million based on the instant payment note, and notified the transfer to the Defendant clan on the 11st of the same month, and reached around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, and Eul 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 163 million and damages for delay, unless there are special circumstances.

3. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The summary of the claim is that the chairperson C voluntarily limited the same without the resolution of the defendant clan, and is null and void.

D In addition, it is invalid because it constitutes a violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act by finding out the ground of the defendant clan even though it is not an attorney-at-law, and dealing with all litigation-related affairs, receiving compensation, and preparing a note of payment.

B. The management and disposition of collective property under Articles 275 and 276(1) of the Civil Act refers to an act of using or improving the collective property itself or an act of disposing of legal and private performance. Thus, an act of merely bearing simple debt obligations that do not comply with the management and disposition of collective property itself cannot be deemed as an act of managing and disposing of collective property.

I would like to say.

Therefore, a resolution of the board of directors stipulated in the clan regulations is made when the representative of a non-corporate clan performs simple act of bearing debts.

arrow