beta
Text
1. All the appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and the counterclaims filed in the trial are dismissed.
2. Costs of appeal and counterclaim;
Reasons
The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall be judged together.
The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
In extenuating circumstances, which are grounds for dissolution of a cooperative under Article 720 of the Civil Act as to the termination of a partnership relationship with respect to the claim for principal lawsuit, include cases where the trust relationship is destroyed due to a conflict between union members due to anti-defluence and dissation and the smooth joint operation of the cooperative is not expected, as well as cases where it is substantially difficult to achieve the objectives of the cooperative due to changes in the situation of the economic community, aggravation in the property status of the cooperative, business depression, etc., and as such, as long as the continuation of the joint project becomes considerably difficult, even if it is
(2) On February 9, 1993, the plaintiff Gap and the defendant filed an application for provisional disposition prohibiting the transfer of the building in this case against the defendant, and the defendant filed a criminal complaint against the representative director of the defendant, and the defendant destroyed to the extent that the trust relationship between the plaintiff Gap and the defendant could not be restored by filing a lawsuit in this case. Thus, it is reasonable to deem that such ground constitutes an inevitable reason for requesting dissolution of the company, and since the legal brief of this case seeking dissolution of the plaintiff Gap reached the same day with the defendant on May 14, 2014, seeking dissolution of the company in this case, the relationship between the plaintiff Gap and the defendant was terminated as of May 14, 2004, since the legal brief of this case seeking dissolution of the company in this case reached the defendant on the same day.
In fact, the defendant also has a fiduciary relationship between the parties at the same time when it comes to the trial.