beta
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. [Attachment Business Contract and Investment] The Plaintiff and the Defendant made an agreement on May 7, 2012 with a 50% investment, and entered into an agreement on the same business (hereinafter referred to as the “Dong Business Agreement”) with a view to purchasing a parcel of KRW 570,00,000 and arranging the parcel of KRW 570,000 at the time of the split-off, and selling the graveyard in lots, and distributing profits therefrom (hereinafter referred to as the “instant agreement”).
The Plaintiff invested the down payment of KRW 60,000,000 and the intermediate payment of KRW 100,000,000 (the amount of KRW 50,000,000 as seen in the following sub-paragraph (b)), the transfer cost of registration, the construction permit cost of KRW 15,60,000, and the construction permit cost of KRW 10,000,000, and the Defendant invested the intermediate payment of KRW 100,000 (the amount of KRW 50,000,000,000 as seen in the following sub-paragraph (b)).
B. [Project implementation under the same business contract] On January 22, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant divided the instant land before the division into the access road of L 172 square meters, M cemetery 60 square meters, N road 62 square meters, O cemetery 351 square meters, and P cemetery 65 square meters. The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to divide the instant land before the division into the access road of L. 172 square meters, M cemetery 62 square meters, O cemetery 351 square meters, and the access road of P cemetery 65 square meters, which form five lots into a housing site, and divide the five lots into the Defendant’s ownership of 346 square meters, K cemetery 324 square meters, J cemetery 297 square meters, and R cemetery 3
C. [Land Sale] The Plaintiff and the Defendant sold RR cemetery 344 square meters to S around August 2013, and P cemetery 65 square meters to T on August 14, 2013, and Qua land to U respectively.
[Implementation Agreement] The Defendant led the business under the instant partnership agreement, and the contact with the Plaintiff was not easily connected, and there was a dispute between the Defendant and the Plaintiff, even though the Defendant sold the housing site distributed to the Plaintiff and received the price, using the price as the housing construction fund on the ground of H 346 square meters, one owned by himself, and thus, the Plaintiff and the Defendant were divided into the instant land.