logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2016.04.28 2014가합9294
부당이득금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. In around 2003, the Plaintiff entered into a partnership agreement with the Defendant with the content that the Plaintiff would jointly purchase and operate the E-Ba clubs located in Sungnam-si C and D (hereinafter “instant E-Ba clubs”).

The detailed contents are as follows:

The plaintiff and the defendant enter into a partnership agreement for the purpose of jointly distributing profits earned by jointly managing the instant club as follows:

Article 1 The plaintiff and the defendant shall invest 150,000 won in each of the operation of the instant leisure club and jointly manage it.

Article 2 The defendant shall be the representative of the instant age club, and shall perform his duties as a bona fide manager.

Article 3 Registration of business operators shall be registered under the joint name of the plaintiff and the defendant, and the business license shall be acquired in the name of the plaintiff.

Article 4 Distribution of profits shall be made according to the investment ratio after deducting various expenses, etc. necessary for management from the last day of each month.

Article 5 Each partner may transfer his/her own shares in consultation with the other party in disposing of his/her own shares.

B. The Plaintiff received a total of KRW 600 million from the Defendant on July 15, 2009, KRW 20 million on July 2009, KRW 20 million on July 31, 2009, KRW 200 million on July 31, 2009, and KRW 100 million on August 1, 2009.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4, Eul evidence 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant jointly operated the instant age club with the Plaintiff and agreed to pay 50% of the Plaintiff’s investment share among its profits. The Plaintiff transferred 20% of the above shares to the persons related to the instant age club.

Since then, the Defendant paid KRW 600 million (2 billion x 30% of the Plaintiff’s share distribution rate) to the Plaintiff on the premise that the instant age club was sold in KRW 2 billion.

However, the instant age club was sold in KRW 2.9 billion and the Defendant is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff excess shares of KRW 180,000,000 to the Plaintiff.

arrow