Appellant

The Foundation of the Buddhist Cho Jong-sung Foundation et al. al.

Seoul Central District Court Order 2010Gahap66908 dated August 30, 2010

The decision of the first instance shall be revoked.

1. Progress of the case on the merits;

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants against the Seoul Central District Court (Seoul Central District Court 2010Gahap66908) seeking the payment of contingent fees of KRW 900 million and damages for delay arising from the management of delegated affairs of the lawsuit (hereinafter the above case No. 2010Gahap6908).

B. As to this, the Defendants submitted to the Seoul Central District Court an application for transfer stating the transfer of the principal case to the Jeonju District Court, on the ground that “All the lawsuits arising out of this contract was agreed to have the Jeonju District Court as a competent court” at the time of the delegation of the lawsuit between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Cho Jong-sung (hereinafter “Defendant Geumsan”) and the Defendant Cho Jong-sung.

C. On August 30, 2010, the Seoul Central District Court rendered a decision to transfer all the case to the Jeonju District Court ex officio on the ground that the main case does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Seoul Central District Court.

2. Determination

(a) Exclusive jurisdiction agreement and related judgments;

According to the records of this case, on February 14, 2008, the plaintiff entered into a contract of delegation of lawsuit with the Jeonju District Court 2008Gahap1254 case against the Korea Broadcasting System by the Geumsan company, and the plaintiff and the defendant Geumsan had agreed that all the lawsuits arising out of the above contract shall be the competent court (hereinafter referred to as the "agreement of this case") at the time of the contract to the Jeonju District Court.

The Jeonju District Court, which is the competent court according to the instant agreement, has designated, by agreement, the court having jurisdiction over the principal office of Defendant Geumsan as the court having jurisdiction over the statutory jurisdiction. Therefore, it shall be deemed that there is an exclusive agreement excluding other courts having jurisdiction over the statutory jurisdiction.

However, unlike the exclusive jurisdiction of the court, since the nature of the exclusive jurisdiction falls under a discretionary jurisdiction, the relevant provisions of Article 25 of the Civil Procedure Act concerning the jurisdiction of the exclusive jurisdiction do not exclude the application of the exclusive jurisdiction.

B. Determination as to the violation of jurisdiction

Since the agreement in jurisdiction is a litigation agreement between the parties, the agreement shall be effective to the parties and the general successor, and shall not extend to any third party. The Foundation for the Maintenance of Buddhist Relations of Defendant Incorporated Foundation (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Foundation”) is not the parties or the general successor of the agreement in this case, and the validity of the agreement in this case does not extend to the Defendant Foundation. Accordingly, the Seoul Central District Court, which is the legal ground of the location of the principal office of Defendant Incorporated Foundation, has jurisdiction over the Plaintiff’s claim against the

Furthermore, it is examined whether the claim against the plaintiff against the defendant Geumsan is recognized as jurisdiction by the related court of Seoul Central District Court.

According to the records of this case, it is recognized that the plaintiff's claim against the defendant Geumsan is the cause of the claim that the defendant Geumsan has the obligation to pay the contingent fees in accordance with the delegation contract for the lawsuit, and the plaintiff's claim against the defendant Geumsan Foundation for the M&D M&D of the defendant foundation (hereinafter "the defendant foundation") is the representative organization of the defendant Geumsan company and is responsible for the direction and supervision of the defendant Geumsan company, and therefore it is recognized that the defendant foundation has the obligation to jointly and severally pay the contingent fees.

According to such a cause of claim, the plaintiff's claim against the Geumsan company and the claim against the defendant foundation are in common relations with the rights and obligations which are the object of the lawsuit. Thus, the Seoul Central District Court has jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claim against the defendant Geumsan company by relevant trial.

The defendants filed a lawsuit seeking the payment of contingent fees to the Seoul Central District Court by making the defendant foundation which has no original intent to file a lawsuit solely for the purpose of creating jurisdiction. This is an abuse of jurisdiction choice, and therefore, the relevant provisions of Article 25 of the Civil Procedure Act should not be applied.

However, the records of this case alone are not sufficient to see that the plaintiff was a co-defendant for the purpose of creating jurisdiction over the Seoul Central District Court, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Therefore, the above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the Seoul Central District Court has jurisdiction over all the case on the merits, it shall revoke the decision of the court of first instance ordering the transfer of the case on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction (the defendant posted 1,000 won as to the application for transfer submitted to the Seoul Central District Court, and the Seoul Central District Court granted a separate case number (2010Kaga5894) to this in response to the application for transfer submitted to the Seoul Central District Court. Furthermore, according to the records on the application for transfer, there is room to deem that the defendants are applying for the transfer at their discretion, but there is no decision of the court on it. Accordingly, the Seoul Central District Court has to review and make a decision on the application for transfer).

Judge Gu-Appellee (Presiding Judge)