(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.08.17 2017가단5236162

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.08.17 2017가단5236162

약정금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 40 million and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from December 28, 2017 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant (a company that manufactures and sells dental medical appliances: Sknden Co., Ltd.) (hereinafter “instant goods”) as a title called “sales contract” in relation to the purchase of fluids, which are dental appliances (hereinafter “instant goods”).

The contract of this case contains a provision that the Defendant shall issue 4,00 shares to the Plaintiff, and it shall be converted into the instant goods or shall be returned in cash (in the event the Plaintiff claims a return in cash after the lapse of five years from the date of conclusion of the contract of this case, payment of KRW 10 million per share).

B. After entering into the instant contract, the Plaintiff paid KRW 40 million to the Defendant, and was issued 40 million shares by the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff asserts that the contract of this case is obligated to return KRW 40 million to the plaintiff holding 40 million in accordance with the contract of this case, since the contract of this case is a sales contract with the purport that the buyer pays the price in the form of shares and the conversion of the price into the goods of this case or return the price in cash.

B. As to this, the defendant asserts that the contract of this case is not a contract for the sale of goods, but a contract for the acceptance of shares, and that the contents of the contract of this case that the defendant provides for the return of shares from the plaintiff and the payment of shares to the plaintiff in return are invalid because they violate the principle of

3. Determination

A. First, as to the nature of the instant contract, the following are acknowledged by the health class, the aforementioned evidence, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

참조조문

-상법

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 2016.04.06 2015나11787

-춘천지방법원속초지원 2016.06.14 2015가단467

-의정부지방법원 2014.05.13 2013구합1305

-서울중앙지방법원 2021.02.16 2019나66332

-제주지방법원 2015.10.13 2015가단50933