(영문) 창원지방법원 2014.12.24 2014가단76741

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) 창원지방법원 2014.12.24 2014가단76741

약정금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 as well as 20% per annum from June 17, 2014 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 5, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a written agreement with the following contents (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

1. The perpetrator B (Defendant) shall give the injured party A a half million won per month to the injured party A (Plaintiff);

2. A perpetrator B shall grant a KRW 100 million to A if he/she transfers to another person the right to operate the NAC “C” (hereinafter “the instant NAC”) currently operated.

3. The content (1) of the offender B’s face to the victim A shall be null and void.

B. On December 23, 2013, the Defendant transferred the instant neons to another person.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2 and 3

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from June 17, 2014 to the date following the delivery of a copy of the instant complaint to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 2(2) of the instant agreement, as the Defendant transferred the instant NAV car page to another person.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. As to this, the defendant was prepared by the police station according to the plaintiff's accusation against the defendant as a crime of fraud. Since the agreement of this case was prepared by forced execution while the police officer in charge of investigation stated that the agreement would be a case if the agreement is not prepared at the time, it is invalid. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit, since there is no evidence to acknowledge the defendant's assertion.

B. The defendant asserts to the effect that even if the validity of the agreement of this case is recognized, it would be paid as the price for the sale of the NAV car page, and that the NAP was sold in the amount of KRW 40 million, and thus, it is only responsible within the limit of the amount.

However, in Article 2 of the Agreement, the right to operate the instant NAC.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2018.10.18 2017가합32237

-서울남부지방법원 2021.03.24 2020가단15403

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.01.18 2017가합525468

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2016.10.14 2016고정531

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.04.28 2015가단5350958