logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.07.03 2019나4639
약정금
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff was a person who was a member of “E” (15 members) who was a gathering of persons who sell the dissolved in the Young-gu Busan Metropolitan City “D” (hereinafter “D”), and the Defendant performed a general duty as a member of “E.”

E is operated in the same way as daily income is distributed.

B. On May 4, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant, the general secretary of E (hereinafter “instant agreement”) that “the Plaintiff would receive KRW 30,00,000 from the Plaintiff, and give up the business of selling the objects of dissolution in D” (hereinafter “instant agreement”), and drafted a written waiver to the Defendant.

C. Around that time, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the payment of the money under the instant agreement by May 8, 2018, but the Defendant did not pay the said money.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, Eul evidence No. 1, F's testimony of a witness at the trial, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay the agreed amount under the agreement of this case to the plaintiff (see Article 712 of the Civil Act). Meanwhile, in the case of multiple parties to the Civil Act together, if they become the debtor, the multiple debtors are in principle liable for the installment unless they have made a special declaration. However, there are cases where multiple debtors bear indivisible obligations in view of the nature of payment, transaction practices, intent of the parties concerned, transaction relations and transaction circumstances. Thus, in the specific interpretation of the specific case that becomes the debtor together by contract, the court has to interpret that multiple debtors bear indivisible obligations in view of the nature of payment, transaction practices, intention of the parties concerned, transaction relations, etc.

arrow