logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.06.22 2017나2053645
동업약정위반에 따른 손해배상청구 등
Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for this part of the reasoning is as stated in Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the first instance, except for addition, dismissal, or deletion as follows. Thus, this part of the reasoning is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Then, the second page No. 19 of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter referred to as "the second page 19") added "However, the business agreement of this case includes the following: "When operating expenses are needed in excess of KRW 200,000,000, which is the maximum amount to be invested by the plaintiff; when operating K, there has been no specific details as to who will bear the expenses; and how to bear the loss if the loss was incurred while operating K. The business agreement of this case was included in the first page 3 to 5 of the judgment."

The Plaintiff and the Defendant, as a corporation operating KAD on April 13, 2015, established a limited company of KRW 50,000,000 in capital (hereinafter “corporation”) and became an internal director and the representative director of the corporation, and became the Defendant’s internal director.

E. In accordance with the instant agreement, the Plaintiff borne the necessary funds for the opening of the KRA. Not only did the expenses for the test of the KRA exceed the anticipated amount, but also did the Defendant arbitrarily notify the Plaintiff of the total amount of KRW 30 million from April 7, 2015, KRW 6 million on April 20, 2015, KRW 600,000 on April 11, 2015, KRW 300,000 on May 14, 2015, KRW 200,000 on June 3, 2015, KRW 750,000 on June 10, 2015, KRW 300,000 on June 15, 2015, KRW 300,000 on June 25, 2015, KRW 50,000 on his/her own use.

KHA had been opened on June 1, 2015, and the 200 million won that the Plaintiff had already decided to invest before the monthly salary of the employee was due to all of the 200 million won, and the amount of the income of the private teaching institute is the operating expenses, such as tuition fees, monthly rent, and management expenses.

arrow