(영문) 부산고등법원(창원) 2015.01.15 2013나938

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) 부산고등법원(창원) 2015.01.15 2013나938

수익배분약정금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs falling under the following order of payment shall be revoked.

2...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The network E operated a restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) under the name of “G” in the land and building near the land and building near the Masan-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, which is its owner. Plaintiff A, Plaintiff B, Plaintiff B, Plaintiff C, and the Defendant are third daughters.

B. The network E did not have an employee in the instant restaurant.

In May, 200, GW(Death around May 200) was responsible for the operation of the restaurant of this case, the plaintiff A was in charge of customer contact and ice, the plaintiff C was in charge of cooking with his wife, and the defendant was in charge of material purchase and accounting.

C. On June 2000, the network E delegated the Plaintiffs and the Defendant to jointly operate the instant restaurant and to divide the profits therefrom by four persons.

The rest of the children except the Plaintiff B, who operated a restaurant separately in Seoul, operated the instant restaurant as before, but did not separate the earnings between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant.

E died on May 27, 2009.

After the death of E, the plaintiffs and the defendant agreed to inherit the property of the network E including the instant restaurant building. The plaintiffs and the defendant agreed to equally inherit the above inherited property as the deceased's inheritors give up inheritance by representation.

In February 2010, the plaintiffs and the defendant completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the site and building of the instant restaurant due to inheritance by a division in consultation with the plaintiffs A, C, and the defendant, and instead, they agreed that the above three persons recognize that 1/4 of the property profits and losses incurred from the utilization, disposition, etc. of the instant restaurant exist with the plaintiff B (Evidence A No. 4).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-5, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-2, and Gap evidence 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. From 2003 to 2009

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2013.02.21 2011가합993

-서울고등법원 2016.11.22 2015나2064443

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.29 2015가합527415

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.07.25 2019가합520733

-대구지방법원김천지원 2017.05.26 2015가합727