(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.17 2015가단174296

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 2017.03.17 2015가단174296

약정금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 16, 2012, the Plaintiff (the former trade name: T.S. E. S. S. Investment) entered into a contract with B (the representative director and the Defendant; hereinafter “B”) on the consignment operation right (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the following contents.

The term of contract shall be two years; B shall pay the Plaintiff the full amount of the invested amount (Article 2); B shall be KRW 100,000,000,000 of the investment amount as monthly operating profit, from the following day after the Plaintiff is paid the monthly operating profit, which is 2.5% of the investment amount (Article 3); and B shall establish the C sales right as investment security (Article 7) to the right to operate the store (Article 7). The right to operate the store shall include the sales house itself, the amount not paid by the contracting authority, the right to operate the store later (Article 7).

B. On November 16, 2012, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 100 million to a financial account under B’s name.

C. Meanwhile, B transferred to the Plaintiff KRW 41,553,500 in total over 15 times between December 17, 2012 and August 10, 2014 as monthly operating fees.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 4, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant agreed to return KRW 100,000,000 per month to the Plaintiff’s KRW 2,500,000 as a final profit and the contract termination.

However, the defendant paid only KRW 41,553,500 out of the agreed income 60,000,000 for two years, and sold the right to operate the plaintiff's future store to the other party who did not return the investment money to the plaintiff.

B) The Defendant, from the beginning, enticed the Plaintiff as if he did not have the intent and ability to return KRW 100,000,000 of the annual operating profit and KRW 2,500,000 upon termination of the contract, and acquired the Plaintiff’s money by deceiving the Plaintiff (C).

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2016.12.22 2015고단1579

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2018.05.02 2017고단2716

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2017.10.12 2017고단1081

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.31 2014나62762

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.28 2013나57688