(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.01.09 2018가단113881

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) 의정부지방법원 2019.01.09 2018가단113881

투자금반환

Text

1. The defendant confirms that there are claims listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiffs.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 31, 2008, the lease contract (hereinafter “the first lease contract”) with the lessor, the Defendant, and the lessee, the lease deposit amount of KRW 50 million, and the lease term of KRW 3 years was written with respect to Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-gun, and 124.68 square meters (hereinafter “instant building”). G received the deposit amount of KRW 50 million in accordance with the said lease contract.

B. Since then, the above lease contract was renewed several times, and the lease term was changed from April 1, 2015 to April 1, 2017 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).

C. On December 29, 2016 and January 20, 2017, the Defendant sent to the above G a certificate of content that demands the return of KRW 50 million as the lease contract term expires.

On January 31, 2017, G suggested that the head of the Defendant’s branch office collected deposits from Defendant H in various types of business at the time of preparing the first lease agreement, and that the said deposits were voluntarily agreed upon between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant.

On January 31, 2017, the Plaintiffs also sent to the Defendant and G a certificate of content that the amount of KRW 30 million, out of the above lease deposit KRW 50 million, was jointly created between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant.

E. Meanwhile, the instant building has been used by the Plaintiffs and the Defendant for their respective business purposes.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 5, 9, and 10 certificates (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the witness G's testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case filed by a person who has no capacity to be a party is unlawful, since the defendant did not have the capacity to be a party.

However, if one of the subordinate organizations of an incorporated association has the substance as an organization and is carrying out its own activities, it is separate from the incorporated association.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.11.24 2020가단5060341

-창원지방법원 마산지원 2018.06.21 2017가단104791

-서울북부지방법원 2015.11.24 2015나3240

-서울남부지방법원 2016.12.15 2016가합103355

-인천지방법원 2018.06.21 2017나64890