logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원김천지원 2014.07.17 2013가단10822
입회금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around August 2008, the Plaintiff entered into an membership agreement with the New World Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) on Enmarka (hereinafter “instant Enmark”) that is operated by the Nonparty Co., Ltd., and around that time, paid KRW 31.5 million to the Nonparty Co., Ltd.

B. On May 29, 2009, the notary public issued to the Plaintiff a certificate of No. 1802 in 2009, which states that “The Plaintiff shall pay the subscription money up to October 18, 2010, and pay the interest of KRW 3,376,68 for one year and six months on the admission money.”

C. After that, on February 2010, the non-party company filed an application for the workout program with the NAC, a principal creditor bank, on the ground that it was unable to comply with the request for the return of membership fees by the members of the Ri, and on March 8, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement on the return of membership fees with the non-party company and the non-party company for six (6) years from 2010 to 2015.

The non-party company paid KRW 2,105,00 to the Plaintiff on April 2010, which was after the conclusion of the above agreement, for the purpose of returning the membership fee, but did not return the remaining KRW 28,945,00 until now.

E. Meanwhile, Defendant Company was established on March 13, 2012 and is in charge of operating, maintaining, and repairing the instant resort facilities.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 5, Eul's 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 asserts that the Defendant Company is seeking the return of the remainder of the membership fee on the grounds as follows.

㈎ 피고 회사는 소외 회사의 입회금 반환 채무를 면탈하기 위하여 외형만 갖추어 설립된 회사에 불과하고 실질적으로는 소외 회사와 동일한 회사이므로 소외 회사와 더불어 원고에게 입회금을 반환할 의무가 있다.

㈏ 체육시설의 설치 ㆍ 이용에 관한 법률 제27조 제1항에 의하면, 체육시설업자가 영업을...

arrow