(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.12.14 2017가단110215

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 2017.12.14 2017가단110215

기타(금전)

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 37,00,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from August 1, 2016 to July 17, 2017.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 2016, the Defendant agreed to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 37 million (hereinafter “instant agreement”) by July 31, 2016, upon the renewal of the business registration certificate of a limited liability company C (in Vietnam, English E, hereinafter “C”) that is a Vietnam-based corporation (hereinafter “instant settlement amount”).

B. Around June 30, 2016, the Plaintiff transferred 51% of the Plaintiff’s ownership shares to the Defendant, and accordingly, changed its business registration matters, including the said company’s shares and the representative director.

[Ground of recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the instant settlement amount and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff agreed to pay the instant settlement amount by setting the Defendant’s obligation to perform the settlement obligation under the agreement made on the same day as the instant agreement. The time limit set under the instant agreement is merely an additional arrangement in the sense of specifying the period of mutual performance, which is not specified in the agreement. Since the Plaintiff did not perform the settlement obligation under the said agreement, the Plaintiff did not have the Defendant’s obligation to pay the amount under the agreement. (ii) According to the written evidence Nos. 6 through 14, and evidence Nos. 1, 6 through 1, the Plaintiff agreed to take profits from the Plaintiff’s transportation company located in Vietnam, including F and G, around November 2014; and (iii) the Plaintiff made an agreement with the Defendant, the mother of F on June 201, and the Defendant, the company located in Vietnam, to settle the assets and investment shares of the transportation company located in Vietnam (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

Contents of agreement - (Compensatory) assets of the C shall be mutually agreed.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2019.01.10 2018나50137

-서울북부지방법원 2012.10.26 2012고합434

-수원지방법원 2019.05.17 2018구단9273

-수원지방법원여주지원양평군법원 2019.11.28 2019가단45

-광주지방법원 목포지원 2018.12.12 2017가단53201