logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2018.07.12 2017가단103825
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 22, 2007, with respect to the housing reconstruction rearrangement project in Seo-gu B, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Cheongju constituted a promotion committee for housing reconstruction project (hereinafter “promotion committee”) and elected the defendant as the chairman of the promotion committee. On December 26, 2008, the housing reconstruction rearrangement project was approved by the Cheong-si on December 26, 2008.

On the other hand, as a specialized management company of the above reconstruction improvement project, D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "D") was selected and performed the affairs related to the reconstruction improvement project.

B. On June 17, 2016, Cheongju-si revoked the approval of the establishment of an association to the promotion committee, and revoked the designation of a rearrangement zone for housing reconstruction improvement projects related to C on March 28, 2017.

[Ground for recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 3 (including all paper numbers, and the same applies hereinafter) and purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. 1) A summary of the parties’ assertion that if the Defendant lends the operating expenses of the promotion committee to the Defendant, the Defendant agreed to select and order the Plaintiff as a waste disposal company for the future reconstruction project, and lent the Defendant a total of KRW 200 million,00,000 to the Defendant on September 9, 2010, September 16, 2010, and January 5, 2011, and May 13, 2011, without fixing the due date for repayment. After the promotion of the promotion of the promotion committee, the Defendant was obliged to pay the Plaintiff a loan of KRW 200,000,000 to the Defendant, and the Defendant did not receive KRW 150,000,000 from the Plaintiff on September 5, 2009, KRW 150,000,000,000 from each of the promotion committee on September 16, 201.

In relation to KRW 100 million which was received on September 2009 and September 9, 2010, it is not a monetary loan between the plaintiff and the defendant and the defendant.

(b) the board;

arrow