logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 영덕지원 2018.07.05 2017가합27
부당이득금
Text

1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 27,500,000 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and against this, from November 20, 2013 to March 15, 2018.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff’s position 1) The Plaintiff is the Korea hydroelectric Power Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea hydroelectric Power Co., Ltd.”) (hereinafter “Korea hydroelectric Power Co., Ltd.”) with 35 households among 60 residents of Seocheon-gun, Seocheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, North Korea, North Korea, North Korea who had been relocated due to the construction

(2) The Defendant is a company established on December 13, 201, which was established on August 20, 1998 for the purpose of regional development and urban planning projects, to operate a profit-making business with the financial resources of the “Support Project for Residents’ Livelihood Countermeasures” supported by the Defendant.

B. On July 12, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Republic of Korea on the support project for the residents’ livelihood among the said subsidies, the Plaintiff submitted an application to support the business operator for the construction and operation of the penta-type housing complex (scale: 16 square-type 19 Dong, name: ball-type 19 Dong), on the ground of three lots, including 5-1, the North-do Doggra-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, North Korea, U.S., in order to use the said subsidies (hereinafter “instant business”).

After that, according to the approval of the instant project by the Korea hydroelectric Energy, on March 22, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement between the Korea hydroelectric Energy and the Korea hydroelectric Energy to provide the Plaintiff with a total of KRW 2 billion subsidy of KRW 405 million for the instant project.

C. On April 4, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a service contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (hereinafter “instant service contract”) with the name of the service as “permission for development activities (working plans and tourist farm permission)” (hereinafter “instant service contract”) between the Defendant and the Defendant to promote the instant project.

A) At the time, the service period was determined as “from April 8, 2013 to August 7, 2013” (However, the service period was changed from April 4, 2013 to December 7, 2013).

50 million won in total.

arrow