본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
서울중앙지방법원 2020.07.22 2019나42282
용역대금 청구의 소

1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.


1. Basic facts

A. On June 19, 2015, D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter the main contractor omitted) entered into a contract with the Defendant for the sale-to-sale agency service on the C neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “instant commercial facilities”) implemented by the E Regional Housing Association (hereinafter “instant commercial facilities”).

B. On June 26, 2015, the Plaintiff prepared a service contract with the content that, if the sales contract for the instant commercial facilities was concluded with D as a result of the Plaintiff’s business activities, 2.7% of the sales price shall be paid as the service cost.

C. Based on the above service contract, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D seeking payment of service charges of KRW 3,184,984 and delay damages as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2015Da536823, Jun. 22, 2017; and the judgment ordering payment of KRW 32,452,516 and delay damages became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On June 26, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted performance of the contractual obligation (mainly), the Plaintiff concluded a service contract with the Defendant to pay 2.7% of the purchase price when the sales contract for the commercial facilities of this case was concluded by the Plaintiff’s business activities as the Plaintiff’s sales contract. However, upon the Defendant’s request, D and D entered into a service contract with the Defendant as a joint sales agent, and the Plaintiff entered into a service contract with both companies, and thus, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid service cost. D is a company established by the Defendant for the purpose of achieving the illegal purpose as a means to evade taxes on itself and avoid obligations or avoid contractual obligations, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the unpaid service cost to the Plaintiff. 2) The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, including the testimony of witness F of this court and the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone.