logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.02.13 2017고단2784
사기
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and for one year and six months, respectively.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

On June 15, 2018, A was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor and 2 years of suspended execution for violating the Labor Standards Act at the Seoul Northern District Court on June 15, 2018, and the judgment was finalized on June 23, 2018.

Defendant

A is the representative director of the corporation D in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, and Defendant B is the person who actually operated Defendant A with Defendant A.

On March 13, 2015, Defendants entered into a lease agreement with E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E”) (hereinafter referred to as “E”) on some of the second and fifth floors below the building (a total of 5,416.82 square meters) in order to operate the volatile club in the above D building, and began to operate the volatile club from April 2015.

On the other hand, around June 1, 2015, at the Seoul Central District Court located in Seocho-gu, Seocho-gu, Seoul Central District Court established a protocol of protocol prior to filing a lawsuit stating that "if a lessee fails to pay monthly rent, management fee, or public charge for at least two months, the lessee shall order the building, and the amount already paid shall not be returned. At the same time, the lessee shall restore the building to its original state."

From April 30, 2015, the Defendants agreed to pay management fees of approximately KRW 6.57 million each month to E, and from July 30, 2015, KRW 45 million each month, the Defendants paid KRW 6,119,609 on May 8, 2015, and KRW 6,807,07 on May 11, 2015, in addition to the payment of KRW 6,807,07 on October 14, 2015, the Defendants paid only part of the rent and management expenses in arrears.

On April 12, 2016, E applied to the Seoul Central District Court for compulsory execution based on the above protocol prior to the filing of the lawsuit on the ground of nonperformance. On April 28, 2016, E attempted to enforce compulsory execution but failed to enforce it as the resistance of the Defendants.

Defendants are monthly rent and rent to E as above.

arrow