logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.29 2017가합524311
신탁수익금 반환 청구
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Before the amendment of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a trust agreement and consulting services agreement with the Plaintiff: D Co., Ltd. and the Defendant, on June 26, 2012, constructed and sell multi-family housing of the size of 2 underground floors and 11 units and 595 units and 20 units and 20 units above the ground (hereinafter “instant project”).

A) As to the sale-type land trust agreement (hereinafter “instant trust agreement”) with the purport that the Plaintiff shall entrust the Defendant with the instant project site and construct multi-unit housing on the instant project site, and then sell the land and buildings as trust property.

(2) On the same day, the Plaintiff entered into a real estate consulting service agreement (hereinafter “instant consulting agreement”) with the Defendant, separate from the instant trust agreement with the Defendant, for the purpose of “the development feasibility study of the instant project, the analysis and analysis of business conditions, the selection of the contractor, etc. to devise a plan for the land trust in lots,” and set the service remuneration to be paid by the Plaintiff as KRW 50 million, and then paid KRW 10 million as down payment.

On the other hand, Article 6 of the consulting contract of this case provides that " regardless of the date of the conclusion of this consulting contract, the service performance by the defendant was commenced from March 23, 201," and for this reason, the period of this service shall be from March 23, 2011 to the commencement date of apartment sales contract."

B. On the other hand, the Defendant, on March 15, 2017, demanded payment of KRW 500 million under the instant consulting contract to the Plaintiff on March 15, 2017, and expressed his/her intent to offset the Plaintiff’s claim for return of trust proceeds against the Defendant’s claim for return of trust proceeds with the remainder of KRW 490 million after deducting KRW 10 million already paid as down payment from the down payment.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant offset notice”). [The grounds for recognition] does not dispute, and the entry number of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4.

arrow