beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
purport, purport, and.
Reasons
1. The grounds for the court’s explanation concerning this part of the basic facts and the arguments by the parties are as stated in Articles 1 and 20 of the Reasons for the Judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination
A. A. The partnership agreement under the Civil Act is a contract under which two or more persons mutually invest to jointly operate a business, and it can be deemed as a partnership agreement only for an agreement to jointly operate a specific business, and the degree of the achievement of a common purpose does not meet the requirements for establishment of a partnership.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Da60778 Decided April 9, 2004, and Supreme Court Decision 2003Da18876 Decided November 10, 2005, etc.) B.
In other words, in light of the following circumstances, the instant agreement concluded on May 11, 199 between the Plaintiff and E cannot be deemed as the association agreement concluded between the Plaintiff and E with the aim of jointly managing the instant hot spring development project.
(1) Article 2 of the Implementation Arrangement in the Certificate No. 150, 1999 (hereinafter “instant Arrangement”) provides that “E shall delegate all the powers over the utilization and development of hot spring water to the Plaintiff as a hot spring developer.” Article 3 of the instant Arrangement provides that “the Plaintiff shall have the authority to secure land purchase and development expenses, etc. presented at Ansan-si to promote the utilization and development of hot spring water under the responsibility of the Plaintiff and make all the contracts with Ansan-si and the owner of the funds, etc.” The implementation agreement in the Certification No. 151, 1999 (hereinafter “No. 2 Agreement”) signed by a notary public is the content that “the conditions delegated by this Agreement are premised.”
Even according to the language and text of the First and Second Agreements, the Plaintiff is authorized to conclude a contract with E through the First and Second Agreements.