logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.12.03 2014가단2270
동업정산금 등
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 13,515,363 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from January 25, 2014 to December 3, 2015.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 22, 2012, the Plaintiff, C, and D’s partnership and termination 1) invested KRW 100 million between C, D, and the Plaintiff’s investment of KRW 15,00,00 in each of the KRW 15,00,00 between C, and D, and take over the Fmart in Daejeon-gu E Apartment 2 Complex, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant store”). G (hereinafter “instant store”).

(2) On May 1, 2013, the Plaintiff, C, and D agreed to operate the same and distribute the profits therefrom at the ratio of 1/3, respectively. On May 1, 2013, the Plaintiff, C, and D agreed to bear all the rights and obligations relating to the same business and terminated the same business.

B. On May 1, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a partnership agreement with the Defendant on May 1, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant partnership agreement,” and the partnership between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

(2) As from May 1, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant invested KRW 190,000,000 in the same business contract (Evidence A No. 2) and the shares of Plaintiff 50,000 and Defendant 50%. However, upon the completion of the same business, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to sell the store of this case and to settle the remaining profits from the sales proceeds and operating revenues of the store of this case (hereinafter “the instant business subject to settlement”).

3) The Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant (Account Number H; hereinafter “the cash account of the instant association”).

)(No. 8, No. 1) and the SC Bank Account in the name of the Defendant (Account Number I, “the Credit Card Account of the instant Union”).

(C) The Plaintiff and the Defendant transferred the instant store in KRW 420,00,000 to J on July 12, 2013, using the evidence No. 9 and evidence No. 2 No. 2-1 of the instant union. The instant club business was terminated due to the fact that there was no dispute over the recognition, No. 1, No. 2, No. 4, No. 8, No. 9, No. 1, No. 2, No. 2, No. 2, and No. 2-1, No. 2, and the entire pleadings.

arrow