logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.12.20 2017나20007
투자금
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. D Co., Ltd. was established for the purpose of selling leisure goods, manufacturing and selling diving sports goods, importing, and conducting incidental businesses related thereto, and was dissolved around December 3, 2012 (hereinafter “non-party company”); C was the representative director of the non-party company from November 1, 2006 to December 3, 2012; and the Defendant was established for the purpose of wholesale and retail business, such as scoo and water scoo on March 27, 2014.

B. On March 5, 2010, the Plaintiff drafted “investment agreement implementation document” (hereinafter “instant investment agreement”) with the Nonparty Company as follows.

1. On February 23, 2010, the Plaintiff invested KRW 20 million in a non-party company, and invested KRW 20 million in a total amount of KRW 50 million after March 5, 2010.

(2) On March 8, 2010, the remaining amount of KRW 20 million is expected to be paid to the Plaintiff on March 8, 2010. 2. The non-party company shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 500,000 per annum.

6. When the Plaintiff wishes to recover the investment amount invested in the non-party company, he/she shall request in writing three months prior to the receipt of the written request, and the non-party company shall return the amount invested by the Plaintiff three months prior to the receipt of the written request.

C. On July 2010, the non-party company continued to operate a business due to the closure of a branch office, etc., and in fact, C has been in the status of closure. From March 2011 to March 201, C borrowed money from the Plaintiff to “S” from “Seoul Songpa-gu Ga 2 floor,” thereby engaging in a wholesale and retail business of leisure equipment like the non-party company.

Meanwhile, in order to secure the above loan claims of the Plaintiff, C, in the name of the Plaintiff, and the lease contract of the said business was concluded in the name of the Plaintiff. On March 1, 2014, the Plaintiff and C discontinued the said business. Accordingly, on April 1, 2014, the Plaintiff recovered KRW 40 million as to the said business place.

E. On April 23, 2014, the Plaintiff was Seoul Southern District Court.

arrow