(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.11.19 2015나5243

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.11.19 2015나5243

용역비

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 29, 2013, the Plaintiff drafted an employment contract (Evidence A 1) with the Defendant as follows:

(hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”). Employees: The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30 million each year with the service cost for the performance portion as follows:

(Date: at the time of completion of the loan of BDCC Standby LC, full payment shall be made at the time of completion of the loan of 10 million won, and full payment shall be made at the time of completion of the loan of 5% out of the defendant's profits by settling accounts for sales and expenditure at each performance.

B. However, around February 2013, BDCC Standby LC loans and public performance attractions were final and conclusive.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry in Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including each branch number in the case with a branch number), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 7.5 million to the Plaintiff, even if the Defendant did not enter into the payment agreement as above, since the contract of this case entered into an agreement to pay the amount of KRW 7.5 million to the Defendant for a three-month period from the beginning of December 2012 to the end of February 2013, 2013, providing the Defendant with services, such as English e-mail (E-mail) and international currency, and the Defendant subsequently agreed to pay KRW 7.5 million until the end of February 2013. However, even if the Plaintiff did not enter into such payment agreement, the Defendant is obligated to pay the amount of KRW 7.5 million to the Plaintiff. 2) Accordingly, the Defendant agreed to pay the amount under the contract of this case to the Plaintiff on the condition that the Plaintiff’s service was performed for the three-month period of time and the performance and the attraction of investment. Thus, the Defendant did not have any obligation to pay the said loan and the attraction of investment.

B. First of all, judgment No. 4-W.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2017.06.23 2016고단6392

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.25 2017고단649 (1)

-수원지방법원 2016.09.20 2016가단505086

-대전지방법원 2017.05.16 2016고단2333

-수원지방법원 2017.07.06 2016고단1043