logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2014.11.21 2014노355
배임
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is the promise of accord and satisfaction under the condition precedent, and between them, there was a verbal agreement to deem the completion of construction when the J is under way and completed to the extent that it does not impede the completion of construction. On July 3, 2012, the J performed construction to the extent that it does not impede the completion of construction. Furthermore, on July 3, 2012 when the construction contract was terminated, the amount of construction work exceeds the value set forth in subparagraph 202 of the loan B B, and the Defendants, who received business rights from F, provided the victim as collateral under the promise of accord and satisfaction under the above duty even if they had the duty to implement the procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership set forth in subparagraph 202, and the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the crime of breach of trust, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. After recognizing the following facts, the lower court determined that the contract for payment in kind was not related to the claim for the construction cost which was executed until the time of the contract, but on the condition that the contractor will not pay the construction cost even if the contractor completed the construction work in the future, the contractor is not in a position to claim the performance of the payment in kind to the contractor unless the contractor completes the construction work. Thus, even if the contractor disposed of the real estate at his own discretion, the contract for payment in kind and the contract for sale in kind did not take effect upon the assumption that the contract for payment in kind was concluded in order to secure the balance of the construction work at the same time as the contract for payment in kind. Accordingly, E does not bear the duty of ownership transfer registration for the loan B 202.

arrow